These odds are horrible on the BILLS at +350 ...Buffalo would likely need hone field/bye for these to have value
Cowboys has some value at +750 with that super soft schedule on paper where odds makers will likely only make them the dog in 4 of 17 on the GOY lines..
Bills just finalized their new stadium deal , and Jerry is due to be get some help from Roger and his refs ....Rams schedule is tough , Buccs are not going back( or so I hope ) , and the Packers are taking a step back in overall talent .
BEST OF HEALTH, HAPPINESS,WEALTH, BLESSINGS and LUCK TO ALL !!
These odds are horrible on the BILLS at +350 ...Buffalo would likely need hone field/bye for these to have value
Cowboys has some value at +750 with that super soft schedule on paper where odds makers will likely only make them the dog in 4 of 17 on the GOY lines..
Bills just finalized their new stadium deal , and Jerry is due to be get some help from Roger and his refs ....Rams schedule is tough , Buccs are not going back( or so I hope ) , and the Packers are taking a step back in overall talent .
@DoubleUp4Life Be careful Lawrence is a good QB. He was hooked up with a sht coach. Peterson is a good QB coach. Their FA were costly but needed. Engram, Jones and Kirk will give Lawrence better options. OL much better. Hutchinson is a no brainer #1 pick and will help the D. They have the 7th easiest schedule. 7-10 is attainable.
@Commanders, Texans 2x, Giants, @Lions, @Jets...makes 6...can't expect them to win the rest, but I also expect a slip in one of formentioned 6.
@DoubleUp4Life Be careful Lawrence is a good QB. He was hooked up with a sht coach. Peterson is a good QB coach. Their FA were costly but needed. Engram, Jones and Kirk will give Lawrence better options. OL much better. Hutchinson is a no brainer #1 pick and will help the D. They have the 7th easiest schedule. 7-10 is attainable.
@Commanders, Texans 2x, Giants, @Lions, @Jets...makes 6...can't expect them to win the rest, but I also expect a slip in one of formentioned 6.
Quote Originally Posted by tahoejoe2: @DoubleUp4Life Be careful Lawrence is a good QB. He was hooked up with a sht coach. Peterson is a good QB coach. Their FA were costly but needed. Engram, Jones and Kirk will give Lawrence better options. OL much better. Hutchinson is a no brainer #1 pick and will help the D. They have the 7th easiest schedule. 7-10 is attainable. @Commanders, Texans 2x, Giants, @Lions, @Jets...makes 6...can't expect them to win the rest, but I also expect a slip in one of formentioned 6.
I don't see any gimmies on the Jags schedule....I'd be shocked if they're rhe chalk in more than 3 games next season. ..
BEST OF HEALTH, HAPPINESS,WEALTH, BLESSINGS and LUCK TO ALL !!
Quote Originally Posted by tahoejoe2: @DoubleUp4Life Be careful Lawrence is a good QB. He was hooked up with a sht coach. Peterson is a good QB coach. Their FA were costly but needed. Engram, Jones and Kirk will give Lawrence better options. OL much better. Hutchinson is a no brainer #1 pick and will help the D. They have the 7th easiest schedule. 7-10 is attainable. @Commanders, Texans 2x, Giants, @Lions, @Jets...makes 6...can't expect them to win the rest, but I also expect a slip in one of formentioned 6.
I don't see any gimmies on the Jags schedule....I'd be shocked if they're rhe chalk in more than 3 games next season. ..
"Wondering if any of these teams could challenge in their divisions = Vikings , lions, Panthers , Cardinals ???" I put Cousins of the VIkings in the same category as Wentz, Goff, Darnold and maybe Mayfield,....perhaps they can throw the ball through a brick wall, or look good coming out of the shower....they probably scored well in analytical ratings, but when it comes to leading their team to Ws and all the nuances involved they are bad to abysmal. Their teams start at an average up to 7 point deficits each game that have to be made up by good coaching, turnovers created by their teammates or something else. Something I am going to do this year for the first time is to make a power rating before each game of the individual quarterbacks starting for each team with zero being average to see if that might be predictive. For example I'd rate Brady a +7 and Cousins -4 if they played the first game of next season.......that would be the Bucs -11 and then adjust 1.5 points for home field. The Vikings and Panthers had average rosters and the Colts and Browns had good rosters otherwise, and the Browns and the Colts are well coached........I surmise that the Panthers are pretty well coached too, at least on defense. Jimmy G is running out of teams to be traded to....you'd have to reckon that he'd go to the Panthers for a bag of slightly used footballs. The 49ers wouldn't keep him, would they?
"Wondering if any of these teams could challenge in their divisions = Vikings , lions, Panthers , Cardinals ???" I put Cousins of the VIkings in the same category as Wentz, Goff, Darnold and maybe Mayfield,....perhaps they can throw the ball through a brick wall, or look good coming out of the shower....they probably scored well in analytical ratings, but when it comes to leading their team to Ws and all the nuances involved they are bad to abysmal. Their teams start at an average up to 7 point deficits each game that have to be made up by good coaching, turnovers created by their teammates or something else. Something I am going to do this year for the first time is to make a power rating before each game of the individual quarterbacks starting for each team with zero being average to see if that might be predictive. For example I'd rate Brady a +7 and Cousins -4 if they played the first game of next season.......that would be the Bucs -11 and then adjust 1.5 points for home field. The Vikings and Panthers had average rosters and the Colts and Browns had good rosters otherwise, and the Browns and the Colts are well coached........I surmise that the Panthers are pretty well coached too, at least on defense. Jimmy G is running out of teams to be traded to....you'd have to reckon that he'd go to the Panthers for a bag of slightly used footballs. The 49ers wouldn't keep him, would they?
Quote Originally Posted by Indigo999: "Wondering if any of these teams could challenge in their divisions = Vikings , lions, Panthers , Cardinals ???" I put Cousins of the VIkings in the same category as Wentz, Goff, Darnold and maybe Mayfield,....perhaps they can throw the ball through a brick wall, or look good coming out of the shower....they probably scored well in analytical ratings, but when it comes to leading their team to Ws and all the nuances involved they are bad to abysmal. Their teams start at an average up to 7 point deficits each game that have to be made up by good coaching, turnovers created by their teammates or something else. Something I am going to do this year for the first time is to make a power rating before each game of the individual quarterbacks starting for each team with zero being average to see if that might be predictive. For example I'd rate Brady a +7 and Cousins -4 if they played the first game of next season.......that would be the Bucs -11 and then adjust 1.5 points for home field. The Vikings and Panthers had average rosters and the Colts and Browns had good rosters otherwise, and the Browns and the Colts are well coached........I surmise that the Panthers are pretty well coached too, at least on defense. Jimmy G is running out of teams to be traded to....you'd have to reckon that he'd go to the Panthers for a bag of slightly used footballs. The 49ers wouldn't keep him, would they? I agree with you a lot. But I disagree with you on Cousins. He is way better than the others and it is not that close.
cousins sucks bro.. have you seen him play? Check down here, miss throw there, sack around corner, maybe hits a 20yd pass to thelien to get 3 pts.. and then wait on the defense for a turnover. He’s a game manager not a football player, boring as shit.
Quote Originally Posted by Indigo999: "Wondering if any of these teams could challenge in their divisions = Vikings , lions, Panthers , Cardinals ???" I put Cousins of the VIkings in the same category as Wentz, Goff, Darnold and maybe Mayfield,....perhaps they can throw the ball through a brick wall, or look good coming out of the shower....they probably scored well in analytical ratings, but when it comes to leading their team to Ws and all the nuances involved they are bad to abysmal. Their teams start at an average up to 7 point deficits each game that have to be made up by good coaching, turnovers created by their teammates or something else. Something I am going to do this year for the first time is to make a power rating before each game of the individual quarterbacks starting for each team with zero being average to see if that might be predictive. For example I'd rate Brady a +7 and Cousins -4 if they played the first game of next season.......that would be the Bucs -11 and then adjust 1.5 points for home field. The Vikings and Panthers had average rosters and the Colts and Browns had good rosters otherwise, and the Browns and the Colts are well coached........I surmise that the Panthers are pretty well coached too, at least on defense. Jimmy G is running out of teams to be traded to....you'd have to reckon that he'd go to the Panthers for a bag of slightly used footballs. The 49ers wouldn't keep him, would they? I agree with you a lot. But I disagree with you on Cousins. He is way better than the others and it is not that close.
cousins sucks bro.. have you seen him play? Check down here, miss throw there, sack around corner, maybe hits a 20yd pass to thelien to get 3 pts.. and then wait on the defense for a turnover. He’s a game manager not a football player, boring as shit.
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.