Chicken Little and Boy Who Cired Wolves, please help me to understand. | Page 8 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Chicken Little and Boy Who Cired Wolves, please help me to understand.

Two things needed to be a perennial contender.
QB. We will see if Tua is it, but potential is sky for him.
Coach. Flores is still learning lots of things. As of now we cannot make any conclusions about him.
Hopefully those two are the real thing. Everything else is way easily corrected/done.
 
I wasn't laying al the blame on NNamdi. I was just making an observation that he went from all-world to above average/average. It seemed like he had no heart by the time he suited up for Philly. It was inexplicable. If i recall correctly, that team also brought in Ronnie Brown, Rodgers-Cromartie, Steve Smith (from the Giants), and Vince Young (to backup Vick).
You mean the team that the backup QB, Vince Young, deemed the NFL Dream Team?
 
How you (not you, but previous posters) decide to tie offense into that turns it into a subjective argument at that point.
Fins offense take early 2 score lead, defense looks much better... Hmmmm....
 
Fins offense take early 2 score lead, defense looks much better... Hmmmm....
No intelligent person would argue that either side doesn't put the other in good or bad situations.

Of course it's easier on the D to play with a multi score lead.

On the other hand, if you don't have an at least competent D, you are going to have tough sledding come playoff time.

Call me selfish. I want a high powered O, AND a smothering D.
 
Fins offense take early 2 score lead, defense looks much better... Hmmmm....
That is the case in any scenario ever though. If you have a great secondary you make it hard for teams to pass. If you have a great pass rush you make it hard for teams to pass.
 
That is the case in any scenario ever though. If you have a great secondary you make it hard for teams to pass. If you have a great pass rush you make it hard for teams to pass.
Not any scenario... When playing from behind, the opponents dont have as much of an incentive to pass, so it becomes more of a chess game than it is when you can just pin your ears back...
 
Not any scenario... When playing from behind, the opponents dont have as much of an incentive to pass, so it becomes more of a chess game than it is when you can just pin your ears back...
I meant any scenario where you have a lead. You argue against stacking secondary, but what's the alternative? Just stack the offense? We did. We drafted 3 Olineman and a QB of the future. They're young and you can't pocket the money. They're not even long term deals on defense anyway.
 
I agree that the negativity gets to the point of being unreasonable with some, but the oddsmakers don't base it on how they think games will actually turn out. They make lines based on the $. That is all that matters to them. For example, when a line moves, it is because more is coming in on one side than the other, not because thier opinion has changed.

That is not correct at all regarding season win/over unders. Those numbers are indeed set based on how the oddsmakers think the games will turn out. Each game is assigned a theoretical point spread, well in advance. Then the money line for each point spread is incorporated. For example, a 3 point favorite is basically -150 in man to man terms, or 3 chances in 5. If a team is projected to be a 3 point favorite in a December game then -150 is assigned to that week, during summer when the over/unders are established.

And so forth. Once all 16 games have assigned piece by piece likelihood of victory, then the formula kicks in regarding how many wins in translation among 16. That's where the 5.5 wins came from. It was purely mathematical based on the schedule and the preseason power ratings assigned to each game.

During the mid to late '90s I teamed with two guys in a betting group. One of them was incredibly sharp in figuring out those season win numbers, before the sportsbooks were as advanced with the formula. Consequently we bet huge on those things and the numbers would always shift in our favor.
 
That is not correct at all regarding season win/over unders. Those numbers are indeed set based on how the oddsmakers think the games will turn out. Each game is assigned a theoretical point spread, well in advance. Then the money line for each point spread is incorporated. For example, a 3 point favorite is basically -150 in man to man terms, or 3 chances in 5. If a team is projected to be a 3 point favorite in a December game then -150 is assigned to that week, during summer when the over/unders are established.

And so forth. Once all 16 games have assigned piece by piece likelihood of victory, then the formula kicks in regarding how many wins in translation among 16. That's where the 5.5 wins came from. It was purely mathematical based on the schedule and the preseason power ratings assigned to each game.

During the mid to late '90s I teamed with two guys in a betting group. One of them was incredibly sharp in figuring out those season win numbers, before the sportsbooks were as advanced with the formula. Consequently we bet huge on those things and the numbers would always shift in our favor.
True.

I was, indeed, generalizing. Not all sports betting lines are created the same way. The baseline for yearly over/unders, prop wagers, etc, all have different methods of establishment.
 
Back
Top Bottom