My "contrarians" for this weekend.

[TheShrimp]

SF is laying 3.5 to the giants. SF who has been beat at home by PHI and GB. Lost to NO, couldn't cover against ZONA, STL or DALL finishing the season. They're playing the NFL's hottest team, coming in off a win against PHI, a big road win at INDY, a devastation of DALL.

Right here on these very pages, WWTS Bet Manager Buck saying the Giants could be the wild card team that goes all the way this year. Shockey, Toomer, Strahan. Geez they're tough.

And they're getting a FG and a hook. NYG have GOT to be the pick, right? The books look like they're just BEGGIN ya to take the points here.

--

Not to mention the Jets, playing the stumbling bumbling Colts who got by the lowly Jags and who were embarassed at home the previous week.

The JETS, getting the huge win at NE in week 16, crushing the Pack at home who NEEDED a win. They're on an absolute tear since Pennington took over, the Tom Brady of 2002 isn't he?

And the Jets are only giving up 6.5? Gotta be the play, right?

--

And whoa, what's this? The Cold Miser Brett Favre and The Pack at home in January also giving up less than a TD to ATL, who couldn't beat CLE or SEA down the stretch when they needed to? ATL, with the first year starter who has never played in the post season before. That's a lock if I ever saw it.

--

Boy, then you got CLE, the 5-3 road team with two 3 point losses to PITT this year. Coming into the playoffs off a big win against Mike Vick. And Pitt needed some friendly fortune to get by the anemic Ravens last weekend? You want to spot them a TD and a point? You must be nuts.

Why stop now?

My picks:
SF
PITT
ATL
INDY

 

[Vegas Dave]

Thank you.....I'm glad somebody posted my thoughts exactly, I didn't want to do all that writing.

I agree with three of the picks, and I agree with your logic on the Jets - Colts pick, but I just have a feeling that the Jets may cover it anyways. Just a gut...

Young QB's sometimes help the public out

 

[gardenweasel]

shrimp

shrimp

i respect your opinion....but your reasoning(or lack thereof)has me stumped......are you saying that the wise thing to do is to throw out all rational thought in handicapping a game and just go against the public?.......i have heard this argument more times than bill parcells has made comebacks.....if that`s the take here,okie doke....just curious....seems like people have given up on actually looking at the games and are just logging onto wagerline and going anti-public.....but,if that`s the case,that`s fine...it works in the ncaa b`ball tourney....just trying to get a clarification....

 

[Vegas Dave]

Going against the public is the idea.....

but wagerline isn't always accurate. So many people go against the public nowadays that they consider this before they make their picks.

It's hard to find where the money actually is, but if you can use wagerline as one of your sources, along with maybe 2 or 3 other sources to confirm, thats usually the best.

But to be honest, you can usually just pick out the game that the public will hop all over, like Green Bay this week.

 

[TheShrimp]

weas -- not really. nothing's ever that easy. The post was made slightly in jest, but I had my reasons for all my selections this weekend.

Though Niners were never in danger of covering, they were able to move on the giants just like I thought they would. They did give the Giants that really short field on the punt muff and were still only a couple points away from the cover. I did not foresee Giants putting up 38 on them. Their offense has been clicking since Fassel took over the play calling, but I thought they were still out in front of where they should have been. SF had answers for Collins in their recent meetings, but not yesterday. You really shouldn't feel like you need to double cover a rookie TE no matter how good he's been. That burned them.

I knew Indy had weaknesses but I thought Pennington might come back to earth in his first PO start. I was looking at this one like Raiders/Pats last season, and with Indy getting the 6, it looked like gravy. That was a team that got down and gave up.

Now, CLE did look too obvious to me, and that really pushed me towards the Steelers. I know how bad the Steelers looked against the Ravens in Wk 17, but they also looked real good against the Bucs in Wk 16, great against Caro in Wk 15. I thought they'd really turn it on, but you give up that opening kickoff, go 3 and out and then get a 70 yarder on your ass, and it's all up hill from there.

FWIW, Vegas, I don't even know what wagerline is.

I suppose I did throw some perceptions out the window. SF has been my favorite fade this season. They covered more early on, but their "no cover" streak involved injuries, and then recovery from injuries. I thought they'd be back on track this weekend (which they really were -- just too many given up).

These went 1-3 but my two big sides went 1-1 (sf and atl) with +105 on both of them so it wasn't as bad for me as it seemed.