A lot of people are calling for the Chiefs to further regress this year... Not me. Consider that last year Mahomes passed for the least amount of yards in his career, and was sacked the most times. (You can attribute a lot of that to their offensive line troubles, particularly on the left side which amounted to a band-aid solution). That tells me he wasn't able to stretch the ball downfield as much as he'd like because he didn't have time in the pocket. Their WR corps looks solid this year, and Kelce seems to be taking this seriously by slimming down quite a bit. Also, Pacheco and Hunt in the backfield is something they didn't have all of last year. But most importantly, their OL seems to be much improved already, w rookie Josh Simmons from OSU asserting himself at left tackle. For all those close games that KC won last year, maybe they won't need to worry about them occurring so frequently. People seem to be making the mistake that KC is standing still while DEN, LVR, and DEN get better.
I agree with what you are saying .........
KC may not have as many close games, that is possible but look at the years I posted. 8, 9 10,10, and 11 close wins last year.
I agree they could be better this season but they could regress even though they are better. This is quite common actually because it is difficult to get the same luck going their way.
A lot of people are calling for the Chiefs to further regress this year... Not me. Consider that last year Mahomes passed for the least amount of yards in his career, and was sacked the most times. (You can attribute a lot of that to their offensive line troubles, particularly on the left side which amounted to a band-aid solution). That tells me he wasn't able to stretch the ball downfield as much as he'd like because he didn't have time in the pocket. Their WR corps looks solid this year, and Kelce seems to be taking this seriously by slimming down quite a bit. Also, Pacheco and Hunt in the backfield is something they didn't have all of last year. But most importantly, their OL seems to be much improved already, w rookie Josh Simmons from OSU asserting himself at left tackle. For all those close games that KC won last year, maybe they won't need to worry about them occurring so frequently. People seem to be making the mistake that KC is standing still while DEN, LVR, and DEN get better.
I agree with what you are saying .........
KC may not have as many close games, that is possible but look at the years I posted. 8, 9 10,10, and 11 close wins last year.
I agree they could be better this season but they could regress even though they are better. This is quite common actually because it is difficult to get the same luck going their way.
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Quote Originally Posted by incognegro: @theclaw Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: I'll have some info on KC'S monstrous -4.8 expected wins coming soon. If you don't think KC will regress they already have not once but twice in the Mahomes era and in the process produced the 2 worst records of the Mahomes era. And now they have by far their largest negative expected wins. We'll take a look at how a larger expected win negative or positive effects the number of games each team regressed. KC win UNDER 11.5 games (-210) --- 2.1 units to win 1 unit Don't be surprised if KC loses more close games after week 1 then they did all last season which was 0. And they just might be 0-2 after 2 weeks. Is this line a typo? under 11.5 is currently around -130, or am I missing something? Thanks for pointing that out ................... I was thinking taking a 3 game regression would be under 12.5 that was the -210 which was a great price based on what I see out there. 72% probability they regress by 3 games based on past history. Then I changed my mind and took a 4 game regression or under 11.5, I did get -135. But was still thinking about the -210 when I posted that pick. Thanks again Congratulations on nabbing that great price. KC Under 12.5 is -250 at Heritage. Under 11.5 is -130.
That was my initial play I was planning to make but after more research I decided to take the Under 11.5 at -135 but Posted-210 as that price was in my mind.
I will make that play under 12.5 but can't get that price anymore unfortunately.
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Quote Originally Posted by incognegro: @theclaw Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: I'll have some info on KC'S monstrous -4.8 expected wins coming soon. If you don't think KC will regress they already have not once but twice in the Mahomes era and in the process produced the 2 worst records of the Mahomes era. And now they have by far their largest negative expected wins. We'll take a look at how a larger expected win negative or positive effects the number of games each team regressed. KC win UNDER 11.5 games (-210) --- 2.1 units to win 1 unit Don't be surprised if KC loses more close games after week 1 then they did all last season which was 0. And they just might be 0-2 after 2 weeks. Is this line a typo? under 11.5 is currently around -130, or am I missing something? Thanks for pointing that out ................... I was thinking taking a 3 game regression would be under 12.5 that was the -210 which was a great price based on what I see out there. 72% probability they regress by 3 games based on past history. Then I changed my mind and took a 4 game regression or under 11.5, I did get -135. But was still thinking about the -210 when I posted that pick. Thanks again Congratulations on nabbing that great price. KC Under 12.5 is -250 at Heritage. Under 11.5 is -130.
That was my initial play I was planning to make but after more research I decided to take the Under 11.5 at -135 but Posted-210 as that price was in my mind.
I will make that play under 12.5 but can't get that price anymore unfortunately.
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Quote Originally Posted by incognegro: @theclaw Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: I'll have some info on KC'S monstrous -4.8 expected wins coming soon. If you don't think KC will regress they already have not once but twice in the Mahomes era and in the process produced the 2 worst records of the Mahomes era. And now they have by far their largest negative expected wins. We'll take a look at how a larger expected win negative or positive effects the number of games each team regressed. KC win UNDER 11.5 games (-210) --- 2.1 units to win 1 unit Don't be surprised if KC loses more close games after week 1 then they did all last season which was 0. And they just might be 0-2 after 2 weeks. Is this line a typo? under 11.5 is currently around -130, or am I missing something? Thanks for pointing that out ................... I was thinking taking a 3 game regression would be under 12.5 that was the -210 which was a great price based on what I see out there. 72% probability they regress by 3 games based on past history. Then I changed my mind and took a 4 game regression or under 11.5, I did get -135. But was still thinking about the -210 when I posted that pick. Thanks again no problem brother, you’re one of the best. Best wishes this season!
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Quote Originally Posted by incognegro: @theclaw Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: I'll have some info on KC'S monstrous -4.8 expected wins coming soon. If you don't think KC will regress they already have not once but twice in the Mahomes era and in the process produced the 2 worst records of the Mahomes era. And now they have by far their largest negative expected wins. We'll take a look at how a larger expected win negative or positive effects the number of games each team regressed. KC win UNDER 11.5 games (-210) --- 2.1 units to win 1 unit Don't be surprised if KC loses more close games after week 1 then they did all last season which was 0. And they just might be 0-2 after 2 weeks. Is this line a typo? under 11.5 is currently around -130, or am I missing something? Thanks for pointing that out ................... I was thinking taking a 3 game regression would be under 12.5 that was the -210 which was a great price based on what I see out there. 72% probability they regress by 3 games based on past history. Then I changed my mind and took a 4 game regression or under 11.5, I did get -135. But was still thinking about the -210 when I posted that pick. Thanks again no problem brother, you’re one of the best. Best wishes this season!
I wonder if Chiefs will get favorable calls in Brazil otherwise I'm liking the Chargers to possibly get the cover hesitant to bet them on the ml as I typically do when taking dogs gl claw this season
Yes always a concern with KC and Mahomes..,....
With a small line I agree ML is very likely possibility. If Chargers cover they should have a great shot to win SU. I think they will.
Favorites cover at a good rate in international games from what I saw online.
I did play Packers last year over Eagles in Brazil and lost. Eagles were the fav.
But I will take who my method calls for me to take.
I wonder if Chiefs will get favorable calls in Brazil otherwise I'm liking the Chargers to possibly get the cover hesitant to bet them on the ml as I typically do when taking dogs gl claw this season
Yes always a concern with KC and Mahomes..,....
With a small line I agree ML is very likely possibility. If Chargers cover they should have a great shot to win SU. I think they will.
Favorites cover at a good rate in international games from what I saw online.
I did play Packers last year over Eagles in Brazil and lost. Eagles were the fav.
But I will take who my method calls for me to take.
This season there are 2 teams either positive or negative 2.5 or higher expected wins.
KC -4.8
Vikings -2.9
KC is in the upper bracket -3 or higher which equates to a 4 game regression.
Vikings in the lower bracket -2.5 to -2.9 which equates to a 3 game regression.
We'll see how it goes.
No teams +2.5 or higher.
Coming into Last season saw no teams at all +2.5 or -2.5.
The price to back the Vikings Under for a 3 game regression is way to high a price to pay.
Vikings were 9 wins and 1 loss = +8 in close 1 score games.
Regressing by 5 or 6 games is a low probability play based on the the history of expected wins.
However there are other factors that will contribute to a teams final record so if you feel those other factors weigh heavy on fewer wins for the Vikings then you might have an Under play.
This season there are 2 teams either positive or negative 2.5 or higher expected wins.
KC -4.8
Vikings -2.9
KC is in the upper bracket -3 or higher which equates to a 4 game regression.
Vikings in the lower bracket -2.5 to -2.9 which equates to a 3 game regression.
We'll see how it goes.
No teams +2.5 or higher.
Coming into Last season saw no teams at all +2.5 or -2.5.
The price to back the Vikings Under for a 3 game regression is way to high a price to pay.
Vikings were 9 wins and 1 loss = +8 in close 1 score games.
Regressing by 5 or 6 games is a low probability play based on the the history of expected wins.
However there are other factors that will contribute to a teams final record so if you feel those other factors weigh heavy on fewer wins for the Vikings then you might have an Under play.
Quote Originally Posted by Digitalkarma: I wonder if Chiefs will get favorable calls in Brazil otherwise I'm liking the Chargers to possibly get the cover hesitant to bet them on the ml as I typically do when taking dogs gl claw this season Yes always a concern with KC and Mahomes..,.... With a small line I agree ML is very likely possibility. If Chargers cover they should have a great shot to win SU. I think they will. Favorites cover at a good rate in international games from what I saw online. I did play Packers last year over Eagles in Brazil and lost. Eagles were the fav. But I will take who my method calls for me to take. Best of luck to you this season DK.........
This is true. The query is fairly simple:
F and site = neutral and week < 15.5
SU: 39-14-1 (7.4,73.6%)
ATS: 34-19-1 (3.8,64.2%)
That looks pretty solid. Delving further:
and line > -3.7
ATS: 17-12-1 (1.6,58.6%) I would not rely on such a narrow average ATS margin of just 1.6 points.
and line < -3.7
ATS: 17-7 (6.5,70.8%) In this particular instance, bigger favorites do better ATS.
F and site = neutral and week < 15.5 and DIV
ATS: 7-2 (8.1,77.8%) That does look better for KC, but that is a small sample size.
As of now I have passed on this game. I do have a rooting interest for LAC (I live in Los Angeles), so I just might watch this game. It's not as if I will have a lot of opportunities to watch crappy CLV this year.
Quote Originally Posted by Digitalkarma: I wonder if Chiefs will get favorable calls in Brazil otherwise I'm liking the Chargers to possibly get the cover hesitant to bet them on the ml as I typically do when taking dogs gl claw this season Yes always a concern with KC and Mahomes..,.... With a small line I agree ML is very likely possibility. If Chargers cover they should have a great shot to win SU. I think they will. Favorites cover at a good rate in international games from what I saw online. I did play Packers last year over Eagles in Brazil and lost. Eagles were the fav. But I will take who my method calls for me to take. Best of luck to you this season DK.........
This is true. The query is fairly simple:
F and site = neutral and week < 15.5
SU: 39-14-1 (7.4,73.6%)
ATS: 34-19-1 (3.8,64.2%)
That looks pretty solid. Delving further:
and line > -3.7
ATS: 17-12-1 (1.6,58.6%) I would not rely on such a narrow average ATS margin of just 1.6 points.
and line < -3.7
ATS: 17-7 (6.5,70.8%) In this particular instance, bigger favorites do better ATS.
F and site = neutral and week < 15.5 and DIV
ATS: 7-2 (8.1,77.8%) That does look better for KC, but that is a small sample size.
As of now I have passed on this game. I do have a rooting interest for LAC (I live in Los Angeles), so I just might watch this game. It's not as if I will have a lot of opportunities to watch crappy CLV this year.
Like the Giants, but it seems like it's a popular play this week.
I think despite the NFC Championship game appearance last season, Washington has been so bad for the past 30+ years that still nobody believes in them. Doesn't help either that they went 0-3 in preseason and got absolutely crushed in all 3 games.
Will lay off this week, but I can see where you're coming from. Week 1 is tough. First game of the season, every team gets the benefit of the doubt.
Ton of short lines this week. Only 2 games where the line is above 7. Dunno where to start.
Like the Giants, but it seems like it's a popular play this week.
I think despite the NFC Championship game appearance last season, Washington has been so bad for the past 30+ years that still nobody believes in them. Doesn't help either that they went 0-3 in preseason and got absolutely crushed in all 3 games.
Will lay off this week, but I can see where you're coming from. Week 1 is tough. First game of the season, every team gets the benefit of the doubt.
Ton of short lines this week. Only 2 games where the line is above 7. Dunno where to start.
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Quote Originally Posted by Digitalkarma: I wonder if Chiefs will get favorable calls in Brazil otherwise I'm liking the Chargers to possibly get the cover hesitant to bet them on the ml as I typically do when taking dogs gl claw this season Yes always a concern with KC and Mahomes..,.... With a small line I agree ML is very likely possibility. If Chargers cover they should have a great shot to win SU. I think they will. Favorites cover at a good rate in international games from what I saw online. I did play Packers last year over Eagles in Brazil and lost. Eagles were the fav. But I will take who my method calls for me to take. Best of luck to you this season DK......... This is true. The query is fairly simple: F and site = neutral and week < 15.5 SU: 39-14-1 (7.4,73.6%) ATS: 34-19-1 (3.8,64.2%) That looks pretty solid. Delving further: and line > -3.7 ATS: 17-12-1 (1.6,58.6%) I would not rely on such a narrow average ATS margin of just 1.6 points. and line < -3.7 ATS: 17-7 (6.5,70.8%) In this particular instance, bigger favorites do better ATS. F and site = neutral and week < 15.5 and DIV ATS: 7-2 (8.1,77.8%) That does look better for KC, but that is a small sample size. As of now I have passed on this game. I do have a rooting interest for LAC (I live in Los Angeles), so I just might watch this game. It's not as if I will have a lot of opportunities to watch crappy CLV this year. Good luck everybody.
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Quote Originally Posted by Digitalkarma: I wonder if Chiefs will get favorable calls in Brazil otherwise I'm liking the Chargers to possibly get the cover hesitant to bet them on the ml as I typically do when taking dogs gl claw this season Yes always a concern with KC and Mahomes..,.... With a small line I agree ML is very likely possibility. If Chargers cover they should have a great shot to win SU. I think they will. Favorites cover at a good rate in international games from what I saw online. I did play Packers last year over Eagles in Brazil and lost. Eagles were the fav. But I will take who my method calls for me to take. Best of luck to you this season DK......... This is true. The query is fairly simple: F and site = neutral and week < 15.5 SU: 39-14-1 (7.4,73.6%) ATS: 34-19-1 (3.8,64.2%) That looks pretty solid. Delving further: and line > -3.7 ATS: 17-12-1 (1.6,58.6%) I would not rely on such a narrow average ATS margin of just 1.6 points. and line < -3.7 ATS: 17-7 (6.5,70.8%) In this particular instance, bigger favorites do better ATS. F and site = neutral and week < 15.5 and DIV ATS: 7-2 (8.1,77.8%) That does look better for KC, but that is a small sample size. As of now I have passed on this game. I do have a rooting interest for LAC (I live in Los Angeles), so I just might watch this game. It's not as if I will have a lot of opportunities to watch crappy CLV this year. Good luck everybody.
Like the Giants, but it seems like it's a popular play this week. I think despite the NFC Championship game appearance last season, Washington has been so bad for the past 30+ years that still nobody believes in them. Doesn't help either that they went 0-3 in preseason and got absolutely crushed in all 3 games. Will lay off this week, but I can see where you're coming from. Week 1 is tough. First game of the season, every team gets the benefit of the doubt. Ton of short lines this week. Only 2 games where the line is above 7. Dunno where to start.
Like the Giants, but it seems like it's a popular play this week. I think despite the NFC Championship game appearance last season, Washington has been so bad for the past 30+ years that still nobody believes in them. Doesn't help either that they went 0-3 in preseason and got absolutely crushed in all 3 games. Will lay off this week, but I can see where you're coming from. Week 1 is tough. First game of the season, every team gets the benefit of the doubt. Ton of short lines this week. Only 2 games where the line is above 7. Dunno where to start.
How do teams do off 2 SB appearances and off winning over 87% of their games ?
Every team regressed at least 2 games . Every team but 2 won only 10 or 11 games or fewer the next season.
Even some teams not off wining over 87% of their games won only 10 or 11 games or fewer.
Brady in this spot was 10-6 regressing 4 games and 11-5 regressing 3 games the next year. 2 of the worst records he has ever posted.
The only 2 teams won 12 games the next year were 14-0 Dolphins off 2cd SB appearance went 12 -2.
KC with Mahomes off 2 SB's and 14-2 record did go 12-5 regressing 2 games but regressing 3 losses since that was the first year of the 17 game schedule.
And that was the 2cd year of covid which we talked about, in that 2 year period teams did not fall in line with other teams regressing.
Had KC played 17 games their 2cd SB appearance for all we know maybe they don't get to over 87% wins, they could have lost that extra game.
So both these teams that didn't win 11 games or less come with different situations that other teams never had.
Dolphins being undefeated and KC in first year of 17 game schedule and 2cd year of covid.
But even if we give KC all the benifit of the doubt, just because a team beats the probabilities doesn't mean they will do it again.
It is more likely they will not do it again as I have followed this stuff for years and talked about this in the past.
The evidence continues to mount. KC is going to regress and it may not be all that pretty when the dust settles and the season ends.
How do teams do off 2 SB appearances and off winning over 87% of their games ?
Every team regressed at least 2 games . Every team but 2 won only 10 or 11 games or fewer the next season.
Even some teams not off wining over 87% of their games won only 10 or 11 games or fewer.
Brady in this spot was 10-6 regressing 4 games and 11-5 regressing 3 games the next year. 2 of the worst records he has ever posted.
The only 2 teams won 12 games the next year were 14-0 Dolphins off 2cd SB appearance went 12 -2.
KC with Mahomes off 2 SB's and 14-2 record did go 12-5 regressing 2 games but regressing 3 losses since that was the first year of the 17 game schedule.
And that was the 2cd year of covid which we talked about, in that 2 year period teams did not fall in line with other teams regressing.
Had KC played 17 games their 2cd SB appearance for all we know maybe they don't get to over 87% wins, they could have lost that extra game.
So both these teams that didn't win 11 games or less come with different situations that other teams never had.
Dolphins being undefeated and KC in first year of 17 game schedule and 2cd year of covid.
But even if we give KC all the benifit of the doubt, just because a team beats the probabilities doesn't mean they will do it again.
It is more likely they will not do it again as I have followed this stuff for years and talked about this in the past.
The evidence continues to mount. KC is going to regress and it may not be all that pretty when the dust settles and the season ends.
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Bears +1.5 over Vikings --- 3.3 units Bears will be my best bet week 1 with 3.3 units on them.................. Good Luck....Just wondering about your bet size? Why 3.3 units and not 3 units?
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Bears +1.5 over Vikings --- 3.3 units Bears will be my best bet week 1 with 3.3 units on them.................. Good Luck....Just wondering about your bet size? Why 3.3 units and not 3 units?
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Bears +1.5 over Vikings --- 3.3 units Bears will be my best bet week 1 with 3.3 units on them.................. Good Luck....Just wondering about your bet size? Why 3.3 units and not 3 units?
Risking 3.3 to win 3 units.
Of course I could put 3 units but the vig can vary as well.
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Bears +1.5 over Vikings --- 3.3 units Bears will be my best bet week 1 with 3.3 units on them.................. Good Luck....Just wondering about your bet size? Why 3.3 units and not 3 units?
Risking 3.3 to win 3 units.
Of course I could put 3 units but the vig can vary as well.
I like the Eagles -8 tonight based on being my number 1 team last year if we use the game all the injuried players came back for the Eagles.
I am going off what Steve Fezzik said last year.
Eagles rated out as one of the best teams in history if we use that game . They certainly did prove how great they were pounding both Wash and KC in playoffs and SB.
I like the Eagles -8 tonight based on being my number 1 team last year if we use the game all the injuried players came back for the Eagles.
I am going off what Steve Fezzik said last year.
Eagles rated out as one of the best teams in history if we use that game . They certainly did prove how great they were pounding both Wash and KC in playoffs and SB.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.