Sharky's NFL play of the week

[Three]

Enough is enough, but T3 continues to ignore decades old, valuable information when ANYONE opposes his belief, and then goes on a tirade about how they are a troll, and brings up statistical nonsense to falsely validate his points.

I made very good points of what the historical data is not applicable. You not reading them and then commenting just fits that troll definition. I used away games because this is an away game. DAL ran first 80% of the games from the get go and passed with a small lead. Basically everything Exitor said they didn't do.

Since yopu didn't want to read the long fact filled informative version before commenting, as is your MO, I will sum it up. To sum up the nfl doesn't want to lose the DAL national audience in December so the make sure DAL is playing their historically best division rivals and traditional playoff teams in recent years to keep that audience trained to the NFL most marketable product. When they scheduled this game the NFL expected CHI to be a good contending team (since they aren't division rivals) and booked the game for December. Your stats are based and the results are primarily because the teams that DAL faces in December are top quality playoff contenders. The results aren't because DAL can't play in December. CHI doesn't currently fit the mold for the DAL opponents that cast the historic record of DAL in Decembers. That means you are comparing DAL playing a dozen or more perennial playoff teams and top division rivals that were usually also perennial playoff teamsin a game where they are facing a team jockeying for their best draft pick. that is just a really bad use of historical statistical data.

Only, everyone on this earth, except for him, knows that his statistics are byproducts of historic trends,

Yes, the historical trend is for DAL to face their toughest divisional opponents and an array of the top playoff teams in recent years in December in order to draw a huge audience for a nationally marketed team when interest in some football games and teams are waning. Basically DAL historically plays 4 or 5 December playoff games without the playoff sudden death implications. CHI does not fit into the historic trend so the historic trend does not apply to this game. It is not hard for someone that sees stats in their context to get but for someone that blindly uses stats they look beyond the obvious issue with the stat for this game.

Which is why the experts have this as a tight game in Chicago, on the road, in December, with Tony Romo at quarterback. Which is why the experts rank this game in the bottom 4 this week for confidence picks, and why the experts aren't bringing up their 50/50 play selection as any means to "validate" this game.

The more you talk about the "experts" telling everyone that DAL can't play in December because of a record from years of games that don't represent this game the more I think this is a good opportunity. Given the line and my assessment it was a borderline play. Sharps know "expert" consensus that is wrong is where great value bets are made. If you are right about expert consensus the line should move this weak as people bet CHI. Unfortunately 3 is toughest hill for a line to cross due to its frequency of occurrence being so much higher than other MOV so the value may be in the odds that you can get taking DAL rather than a line move. No, it looks like the Sharps got their early bets in and moved the line to -4 or worse. I missed the opportunity. My old boss at the sports handicapping service I worked for years ago must have got his bet down. The books that haven't barred him bet restrict him and move the lines for the games as soon as he bets so fast it must be programmed into their software.

[Exoter175]

I made very good points of what the historical data is not applicable. You not reading them and then commenting just fits that troll definition. I used away games because this is an away game. DAL ran first 80% of the games from the get go and passed with a small lead. Basically everything Exitor said they didn't do.

Since yopu didn't want to read the long fact filled informative version before commenting, as is your MO, I will sum it up. To sum up the nfl doesn't want to lose the DAL national audience in December so the make sure DAL is playing their historically best division rivals and traditional playoff teams in recent years to keep that audience trained to the NFL most marketable product. When they scheduled this game the NFL expected CHI to be a good contending team (since they are division rivals) and booked the game for December. Your stats are based and the results are primarily because the teams that DAL faces in December are top quality playoff contenders. The results aren't because DAL can't play in December. CHI doesn't currently fit the mold for the DAL opponents that cast the historic record of DAL in Decembers. That means you are comparing DAL playing a dozen or more perennial playoff teams and top division rivals that were usually also perennial playoff teamsin a game where they are facing a team jockeying for their best draft pick. that is just a really bad use of historical statistical data.
Yes, the historical trend is for DAL to face their toughest divisional opponents and an array of the top playoff teams in recent years in December in order to draw a huge audience for a nationally marketed team when interest in some football games and teams are waning. Basically DAL historically plays 4 or 5 December playoff games without the playoff sudden death implications. CHI does not fit into the historic trend so the historic trend does not apply to this game. It is not hard for someone that sees stats in their context to get but for someone that blindly uses stats they look beyond the obvious issue with the stat for this game.

The more you talk about the "experts" telling everyone that DAL can't play in December because of a record from years of games that don't represent this game the more I think this is a good opportunity. Given the line and my assessment it was a borderline play. Sharps know "expert" consensus that is wrong is where great value bets are made. If you are right about expert consensus the line should move this weak as people bet CHI. Unfortunately 3 is toughest hill for a line to cross due to its frequency of occurrence being so much higher than other MOV so the value may be in the odds that you can get taking DAL rather than a line move. No, it looks like the Sharps got their early bets in and moved the line to -4 or worse. I missed the opportunity. My old boss at the sports handicapping service I worked for years ago must have got his bet down. The books that haven't barred him bet restrict him and move the lines for the games as soon as he bets so fast it must be programmed into their software.

Not reading? I read everything you have to say, and the issue simply comes down to OPINION. You have this OPINION that the information you represent is Factual and Correct, when in actuality its a byproduct of the statistics and historical data I've been posting, giving way to those byproducts, and yet you're still arguing in circles, claiming I haven't been reading your posts, and haven't been doing my fact checking when in actuality, I've presented BETTER Facts, BETTER analysis, and BETTER trend data.

All you've fucking done so far is post up the box scores of the games, the season, and the home/away statistics, and then ramble on for novel after novel about Dallas running 50% of the time because that's their plan. No, T3, it isn't their "plan" to run 50% every game. Its their plan to WIN those games, and in doing so, they will be allowed to chew up the clock with the run game. If they are SUCCESSFUL, they will achieve 50% run.

That is not to be construed as, they WILL run 50% of the time, and if they win, they win. That's not how it works.

Honestly, I think you just like the sound of your own voice, because literally 65-75% of the garbage you post, could be edited out and we'd effectively still have your response.

[Exoter175]

Little note to mention here, T3's been attempting to berate, belittle, and devalue my analysis for 10 pages now, and he doesn't even know what Division Chicago or Dallas play in, apparently.

[Three]

Little note to mention here, T3's been attempting to berate, belittle, and devalue my analysis for 10 pages now, and he doesn't even know what Division Chicago or Dallas play in, apparently.

Come on, you couldn't get that it was a typo from the context? It was a pretty funny typo though. It even made me laugh when you pointed it out.

[Three]

All right. Conte is out according to Oddshark. I am picking Dal -3.

Week 14 picks: 1) Dal -3.5 @ CHI.

[Exoter175]

I said they were a run first team. I showed they start most games with a balanced attack of 50% run and only pass heavy when time is running out in the first half or from behind at the end of the game of when having a small lead and run heavy when they want to eat the clock. It isn't an opinion it is what they have been doing. You say they run when they are winning when those away games had plenty of first halves where they were down good and continued to run as much as pass. In this pass happy age that is a run first team. You can deny what is clearly presented to you all you want but everyone else sees the fact of how DAL prefers to run their offense. Sure if the game calls for it they pass. Sure if the game calls for it they run. But for the majority of the game when they can choose what to do they are league contrarians running when behind and passing when having a small lead in the third quarter in order to get ahead enough to shift to eat the clock mode while at the same time catching the other team trying to stop their up to that point effective run game. In the one game they came out throwing they fell behind bad and got back in the game with a series of run first drives back into the game. I guess you are one of those people that can't admit when they are wrong. These people like to argue and are really bad listeners because all they listen for is a fragment to argue about rather than try to hear and understand what is being said to have an intelligent conversation.

You are on my ignore list already and after today I will stop opening to see what you had to say. It is a shame to because I tried hard not to put you there because you had enough knowledge to be worth listening to.

The problem we have here T3, is that you believe you are much wiser and knowledgeable than everybody else here making posts. You've had what, 3 or 4 people on this forum discount parts of your posts either because they are misleading, wrong, misguided, or because you're being far too long winded about your points to actually make for solid advice? And that's WITHOUT any of my input here.

If you want to put me on your ignore list, and it surely hasn't helped thusfar, by all means do it. Its clear that I have FAR more respect for people and their opinions than you do, and though I'm a "tough" argumentative time, I'm OPEN to all arguments, so long as both sides are able to see the big picture, and in this scenario, you can't. Something instilled within you WILL NOT let you acknowledge and accept the fact that your PREMISE and "angle" are wrong, though the statistics back them up. You're falsely bearing these statistics as reasons to backup your "premise" but IGNORING the fact that they are merely byproducts of a game much older than you are, and some of us take notice to statistical trends like this.

You're completely unwilling to have an intelligent conversation about opinions, because you enter every situation thinking you are right and there is no possibility of you being wrong, despite pages upon pages in this thread alone showing you being "epicly" wrong on a number of things, and misrepresenting facts and figures which has caused at least one member to lose real world money trusting YOUR insight because on the whole, you're a knowledgeable, valuable member of this forum. Unfortunately, it took a little too long for others to "back" me in my argument against your "letter grades" and what they might misrepresent, and that person lost money.

Work on reading comprehension. OOPs typo. I meant since they aren't division rivals. the context should have clued you into that. I will change it. There are two ways to get scheduled with DAL in Dec (1) as a perennial playoff contender and (2) as a top division rival. That was my point in the whole piece. The previous sentence said you only get a game if you are A orB. They must have expected them to be A since they aren't B. LOL

That is kind of funny though. I hope the others that have had to put up with this got a good laugh for their trouble.

Even THAT is wrong, Dallas almost every single year, has at least 1 of their last 4 games coming against sub .500 opponents.

Perennial contenders my ass. They've played, Tampa Bay, Arizona (Before Arians, after Warner), Cincy (before they got talent), Seattle (Before the legion of Boom), Detroit (Before Stafford), Carolina (Before Newton), St. Lous when they were terribad, KC when they were really awful. The list goes on and on, and that's only in the last 8 or 9 years. Keeping in mind, at LEAST two of those games are mandatory division games, and in years where there's 5 games or an early bye, there's sometimes 3 divisional games in that stretch.

Now tell me again how the NFL would schedule contenders for Dallas in December? Wouldn't it make MORE sense to give them "Cupcake" teams in between the tough division rivals to give them a better chance to WIN in December and enter the post season?

Again, your "Facts" aren't facts. Next you're going to tell me about more things I already know, like rotating inter-conference division sweeps every 3 years.

And now you're going to try to redact based on a typo? You've had several of them so far, but none as "intensely" presented as that one.

Now, you're "Rush more than they Run" comment, THAT was a typo, you've just been slipping your lack of knowledge for 10 pages or so, and I'm pointing it out. You're just too argumentative to give up. That's the real issue.

Come on, you couldn't get that it was a typo from the context? It was a pretty funny typo though. It even made me laugh when you pointed it out.

As many as you've had without the "Intent", no, I couldn't "get" the typo, considering I've already had to correct your intended typos several times in this thread alone.

All right. Conte is out according to Oddshark. I am picking Dal -3.

Week 14 picks: 1) Dal -3.5 @ CHI.

Conte has been repoted to miss this game for almost a week now, that's no reason to now "jump" on that bandwagon.

And look, the line is EXACTLY where I said it was and would be, surprise surprise.

Look T3, I'm not saying the end result you're speculating is going to be wrong, its very possible that both teams could put 10+ on the other in this game, my issue is your APPROACH and reasoning behind this game.

Because of all of the historical tendencies going AGAINST Dallas right now, and the few seasonal anomalies appearing, like Dallas being a 50/50 balance, 5-0 on the road this year, and Cutler being as Jekyl and Hyde as they come in the league this year, that's why I'm calling it a HANDS OFF game, and with zero confidence could a pick be made FOR Dallas in this game.

They say history repeats itself (Romo losing in December), they say what goes up must come down (Dallas being 5-0 on the road this year), and now you have a TNF game where the odds favor the home team, the temperature favors the home team, the temperature greatly goes against Romo as he's like 2-5 in games under 40 degrees historically, and then you have this gem

Cutler has completed over 73 percent of his passes and compiled an impressive 138.2 passer rating against Dallas, his highest passer rating versus any team.

That, my friend, are statistics and trends worth noting for a pick to be made or not made. Not a 117 page novel about Dallas' run game this year where they've really only faced 1, maybe 2 "tough" opponents all season long.

[Three]

All you've fucking done so far is post up the box scores of the games, the season, and the home/away statistics, and then ramble on for novel after novel about Dallas running 50% of the time because that's their plan. No, T3, it isn't their "plan" to run 50% every game. Its their plan to WIN those games, and in doing so, they will be allowed to chew up the clock with the run game. If they are SUCCESSFUL, they will achieve 50% run.

That is not to be construed as, they WILL run 50% of the time, and if they win, they win. That's not how it works.

Honestly, I think you just like the sound of your own voice, because literally 65-75% of the garbage you post, could be edited out and we'd effectively still have your response.

I said they were a run first team. I showed they start most games with a balanced attack of 50% run and only pass heavy when time is running out in the first half or from behind at the end of the game of when having a small lead and run heavy when they want to eat the clock. It isn't an opinion it is what they have been doing. You say they run when they are winning when those away games had plenty of first halves where they were down good and continued to run as much as pass. In this pass happy age that is a run first team. You can deny what is clearly presented to you all you want but everyone else sees the fact of how DAL prefers to run their offense. Sure if the game calls for it they pass. Sure if the game calls for it they run. But for the majority of the game when they can choose what to do they are league contrarians running when behind and passing when having a small lead in the third quarter in order to get ahead enough to shift to eat the clock mode while at the same time catching the other team trying to stop their up to that point effective run game. In the one game they came out throwing they fell behind bad and got back in the game with a series of run first drives back into the game. I guess you are one of those people that can't admit when they are wrong. These people like to argue and are really bad listeners because all they listen for is a fragment to argue about rather than try to hear and understand what is being said to have an intelligent conversation.

You are on my ignore list already and after today I will stop opening to see what you had to say. It is a shame to because I tried hard not to put you there because you had enough knowledge to be worth listening to.

[Three]

And here.

I showed they start most games with a balanced attack of 50% run and only pass heavy when time is running out in the first half or from behind at the end of the game of when having a small lead and run heavy when they want to eat the clock. It isn't an opinion it is what they have been doing.

[Exoter175]

And here.

A historical statistic.

[Exoter175]

Since yopu didn't want to read the long fact filled informative version before commenting, as is your MO, I will sum it up. To sum up the nfl doesn't want to lose the DAL national audience in December so the make sure DAL is playing their historically best division rivals and traditional playoff teams in recent years to keep that audience trained to the NFL most marketable product. When they scheduled this game the NFL expected CHI to be a good contending team (since they are division rivals) and booked the game for December.

I keep going back to this and it makes me crack up.........every......single............time. Conspiracy theory much?

I like the part where Chicago is a divisional rival for Dallas.


#LOLOLOLOL
#somuchforknowingeverythingabouttheNFL

[Three]

I keep going back to this and it makes me crack up.........every......single............time. Conspiracy theory much?

I like the part where Chicago is a divisional rival for Dallas.


#LOLOLOLOL
#somuchforknowingeverythingabouttheNFL

Work on reading comprehension. OOPs typo. I meant since they aren't division rivals. the context should have clued you into that. I will change it. There are two ways to get scheduled with DAL in Dec (1) as a perennial playoff contender and (2) as a top division rival. That was my point in the whole piece. The previous sentence said you only get a game if you are A orB. They must have expected them to be A since they aren't B. LOL

That is kind of funny though. I hope the others that have had to put up with this got a good laugh for their trouble.

[Math Demon]

I am glad I could help. I hope that makes up for the rating system losses. I know you have done well all a lot of my other info too. Unfortunately it doesn't always go that way.

I had DAL -3.5 (-107) to win $50 and the DAL +2.5 and over 45 in a 1:1 teaser for $50. I also had DAL -3.5 (-107) in a $25 open ended parlay. $75 up and I need to pick a bet for the second leg of the $25 parlay that is already paid for out of the $100 win. The choices don't look to good yet. If the injury report or some of the other info doesn't make a good choice I am thinking ML on a favorite and a bet on the dog for a nice middle on a game the dog will likely cover but not win. Or maybe bet the dog in the second leg and tease the favorite in an open ended teaser for a nice middle.

Thanks very much for your help!

I was in the hole due to Week 12. Can you help me with the rest of the Week 14 games?

If you want, just email me your analysis/picks. It would NOT be helpful to other readers, but you can avoid time-consuming arguments.

For the record, I'm NOT siding with anyone. Both Tthree and Exoter have valid points.


Anyway ... NFL Experts, what do you think of these picks? Which sides are correct? Which ones have higher probabilities of success?

1. IND - 3.5 at CLE (IND has better QB, WR1, WR2, K, coach; CLE has better RB, #9 Defense)

2. HOU -5 at JAX (HOU has better QB, RB, WR1, WR2, K, #11 Defense; JAX has one of the top picks in the next draft, #28 Def)

3. BAL + 2.5 at MIA (BAL has better QB, RB, WR1, WR2, K, coach; MIA has slightly better #6 Defense)

4. NE - 3.5 at SD (NE has better QB, RB, WR1, WR2, coach; SD has slightly better K, #12 Defense)

5. SEA + 1 at PHI (SEA has better QB, RB, #3 Defense; PHI has better WR1, WR2, K)

6. KC (pk) at ARZ (KC has better QB, RB, WR2, #4 Defense; ARZ has better WR1, K)

7. DEN - 10 vs BUF (probably laying down too many points; but DEN's average margin at home = 13 points)
(DEN has better QB, RB, WR1, WR2, K, coach; BUF has #2 Defense, snow, and wings)

8. GB - 13 vs ATL (probably laying down too many points; but GB's average margin at home = 26 points)
(GB has better QB, RB, WR1, WR2, #15 Defense, coach; ATL has better Kicker)

9. DET - 10 vs TB (DET has better QB, WR1, WR2, #1 Defense; TB has better RB, K)


Thanks!



UPDATE: What is the effect of BAL's Ngata's 4-game suspension on BAL @ MIA game?

Looking at the next TNF, it looks like ARZ will lose to STL by 3 or 4 points. Is it possible for ARZ to go 0-6 in its last 6 games, finishing the season at 9-7?

[Gamblor]

For the record, I'm NOT siding with anyone. Both Tthree and Exoter have valid points.


Anyway ... NFL Experts, what do you think of these picks? Which sides are correct? Which ones have higher probabilities of success?

1. IND - 3.5 at CLE (IND has better QB, WR1, WR2, K, coach; CLE has better RB, #9 Defense)

2. HOU -5 at JAX (HOU has better QB, RB, WR1, WR2, K, #11 Defense; JAX has one of the top picks in the next draft, #28 Def)

3. BAL + 2.5 at MIA (BAL has better QB, RB, WR1, WR2, K, coach; MIA has slightly better #6 Defense)

4. NE - 3.5 at SD (NE has better QB, RB, WR1, WR2, coach; SD has slightly better K, #12 Defense)

5. SEA + 1 at PHI (SEA has better QB, RB, #3 Defense; PHI has better WR1, WR2, K)

6. KC (pk) at ARZ (KC has better QB, RB, WR2, #4 Defense; ARZ has better WR1, K)

7. DEN - 10 vs BUF (probably laying down too many points; but DEN's average margin at home = 13 points)
(DEN has better QB, RB, WR1, WR2, K, coach; BUF has #2 Defense, snow, and wings)

8. GB - 13 vs ATL (probably laying down too many points; but GB's average margin at home = 26 points)
(GB has better QB, RB, WR1, WR2, #15 Defense, coach; ATL has better Kicker)

9. DET - 10 vs TB (DET has better QB, WR1, WR2, #1 Defense; TB has better RB, K)


Thanks!



UPDATE: What is the effect of BAL's Ngata's 4-game suspension on BAL @ MIA game?

FWIW

(1) I layoff Cleveland because I'm not sure how they are 7-5, not sure what the deal with that team is. Anyone have a good handle on that team?
(2) Lean Houston
(3) I like Miami, would pick them if line goes to to a solid -2.5.
(4) Like NE, but don't like -3.5, would definitely pick them at -3.
(6) Tough one, I predict an eventual KC skid.
(7) At 10, definitely Buf (dont think its there anymore). Bad matchup for Peyton.
(8) The GB/Atl game is all about how healthy Rowdy Roddy White. If healthy, they can somewhat keep up in a shootout.

And Ngata, meh, not the same player since he moved from NT.