| |
Main
Date: 04 Dec 2006 11:01:38
From: DaVoice
Subject: Re: OT NFL WEEK 13
|
Well. Let's take a look at my picks this weekend and see how well I did:
****
Wow did I suck last week! Chargers didn't cover, Denver lost to KC AND the
score stuck at 30 when I picked over 37.5 and on and on. This was by far my
worst week this year. Thankfully, I had no bankroll to place BIG bets and
didn't lose much.
With that said, I think there are some better games to pick this weekend. I
was going to stay away from Tonight's (Thur) game, but can't because of a
significant injury problem:
CIN - 3 at home to BAL
Jamal Lewis is still having foot problems and Baltimore has his listed as
questionable while "Ocho-Cinco" and the Bengals are just getting better week
after week. I think Lewis will probably start and if he's ineffective will
see limited touches, when plays right into the Bengals Defensive gameplan.
The Ravens have one helluva Defense, but Palmer and the boys are really
coming together to put points on the board. I don't know if it *will* be a
blowout, but I suspect the 3 pt spread may be very low. JUMP ON IT, lay the
3 and take the home team Bengals. Mortal lock.
By the way, for those of you who don't have the luxury of the NFL Network
and don't live in either of those markets, you can always follow the game at
http://www.nfl.com/scores Then go to the game and click GAME CENTER. They
have a graphic representation of the game that updates with every play which
is a free service. And they give you the option of paying $9.95 (or
something like that) to listen to the radio pbp of the games from either
home team's broadcast
****
====WIN. There was no question in my mind about this game. To all of you
nay-sayers, bwahahahaha
****
SD -6 at Buffalo
FINALLY a non double digit favorite listing for the Chargers. This pick is
a no brainer. I don't care if there is a 4 foot BLIZZARD, 20 inches of rain
or a beautiful day in Western NY, the Chargers are looking to "run the
table" so they can get homefield throughout the playoffs, or at least until
they have to face Indy in the post season. If they do run the table, and
Indy loses a game, all roads to the SuperBowl will pass through San Diego,
as Baltimore WILL lose tonight vs the Bengals, which gives SD a leg up for
homefield due to the fact that Baltimore is one of only two teams that have
beaten the Chargers this season. If they end up with the same record, and
second to Indy, Baltimore has the tie-breaker due to the heads up victory.
I wanted to look at the O/U in this game, but being played in Buffalo, Lake
Effect snow could really damper the long game, even though LT will run
through snow banks to get another 100+ yd game, the passing game could be
slowed down. 43.5 is huge when weather can be that big a factor. So avoid
the O/U unless the forecast calls for sunny skies and temps in the 50's then
jump all over the OVER, but I'm not using that as one of my 5 picks this
week.
****
====LOSS: SD gave up a dumb TD drive late in the 4th quarter although they
dominated the game throughout, therefore NOT covering the 6 pts, but winning
nonetheless and now having the best record in the league, along with
Indianapolis.
****
SEA +3 at DEN AND Seattle +172 (pinnacle)
Jay Cutler is now the sheep being thrown to the wolves for the first time in
his career. It seems Shanahan has given up all hope of making the SuperBowl
this year, as Jake Plummer, depite his dismal performance over the past few
weeks, has a WINNING RECORD as the Denver QB. I don't believe even the 10
day break between games is enough time to prepare Cutler to play a very
important home game that could determine whether or not the Broncos make the
playoffs.
The Injury reports don't bode well for the Bronco's either, as they've lost
strarting OT Matt Lepsis and starting DE Courtney Brown for the season to
knee injuries, Tatum Bell is still having turf toe problems , and two
Saftey's Ferguson and Brandon are on IR. This will be HUGE for Matt
Hasselbeck who himself is on the injury list with "something broken" on his
NON-THROWING hand. Hasselbeck will be starting and be extremely effective
now that Denver has lost two in the secondary and one good pass rusher.
I'll say it again, as I said when Denver hosted SD. They are only favored
because they're at home. IMHO, Mile High Mystique is OVER for at least the
rest of this season. They had a great shot at making the playoffs as a
wildcard, but now they're putting that in jeopardy to bring in the "future"
QB in the middle of a playoff race. Seattle should be the favorite in this
game, which is why I'm using two picks on this game with the spread and the
money line.
****
====WIN On the Point Spread, which I said was a no-brainer, and
====WIN On the money line. You heard it here first! Seattle would WIN
outright! Denver gave up on their chances to make the playoffs last night,
let alone their "super-hopes". Shanahan may have made a very wise decision
for the future, but I believe Palmer could have been much more effective
against the 'Hawks. So count up TWO MORE WINS on my card here.
****
HOU +3 at OAK
Let's face it folks, this is not the "game of the week" by any means. I've
got one thing to say. "I'm beginning to like Houston's future". They seem
to get it together at just the right times and David Carr, if surrounded by
a better team, has the potential to be a superstar QB. Oakland, on the other
hand is still the most penalized, and most demoralized team in the leauge.
Randy Moss is POISON and the Raiders have ingested that poison (for at least
the rest of this season) asking for a trade in the middle of last week. No
other team in the leauge wants to touch him at the moment, so with Jerry
Porter out, who will they throw to? If I were the linemaker, I would have
this game at Hou -2, even though they *are* Houston and playing on the road,
but the Raiduhs are so damned bad this year, and have so many internal
problems in the front office and the locker room that Houston will breeze
into Oakland and give them yet another embarrassing loss. If not, they will
at least cover the 3 pt. spread.
****
====WIN.....Did you see what I said there? Not only did I think they would
cover, but outright WIN.... They did. Oakland will have an entirely new
staff next year, or Al Davis has lost his mind
****
My 3 team parlay of the week:
CIN -3
SD -6
SEA +6
****
==== LOSS due to SD not covering. Let's face it, SD gave 'em a freebie
For a 4 teamer:
CIN -3
SD-6
SEA +172 (money line)
HOU +3
====LOSS Same reason as above
****
Longshot pick of the week:
While there are two REALLY long shots on the board this week (DET+770 @ NE
and MN +425 @ CHI) I can't go with either one. I'm picking a smaller
longshot that I believe can actually happen:
TEN +360 (WSEX) at home to Indy.
****
====WIN... That's FOUR out of FIVE Longshots in the past 5 weeks. Who knows
how to pick em? huh?
There you have it. 5 locks, a 3 and 4 teamer and a longshot.
FINAL TOTAL LOCKS 4 of 5
PARLAYS 0 of 2
LONGSHOT 1 of 1
DAMN GOOD WEEK AROUND DAVOICE'S HOUSE!!!!
Rick "DaVoice" Charles
|
|
| |
Date: 04 Dec 2006 11:17:25
From: phlash74
Subject: Re: OT NFL WEEK 13
|
DaVoice wrote:
> Well. Let's take a look at my picks this weekend and see how well I did:
>
> ****
> Wow did I suck last week! Chargers didn't cover, Denver lost to KC AND the
> score stuck at 30 when I picked over 37.5 and on and on. This was by far my
> worst week this year. Thankfully, I had no bankroll to place BIG bets and
> didn't lose much.
>
>
> With that said, I think there are some better games to pick this weekend. I
> was going to stay away from Tonight's (Thur) game, but can't because of a
> significant injury problem:
>
> CIN - 3 at home to BAL
>
> Jamal Lewis is still having foot problems and Baltimore has his listed as
> questionable while "Ocho-Cinco" and the Bengals are just getting better week
> after week. I think Lewis will probably start and if he's ineffective will
> see limited touches, when plays right into the Bengals Defensive gameplan.
> The Ravens have one helluva Defense, but Palmer and the boys are really
> coming together to put points on the board. I don't know if it *will* be a
> blowout, but I suspect the 3 pt spread may be very low. JUMP ON IT, lay the
> 3 and take the home team Bengals. Mortal lock.
>
> By the way, for those of you who don't have the luxury of the NFL Network
> and don't live in either of those markets, you can always follow the game at
> http://www.nfl.com/scores Then go to the game and click GAME CENTER. They
> have a graphic representation of the game that updates with every play which
> is a free service. And they give you the option of paying $9.95 (or
> something like that) to listen to the radio pbp of the games from either
> home team's broadcast
>
> ****
>
> ====WIN. There was no question in my mind about this game. To all of you
> nay-sayers, bwahahahaha
>
> ****
> SD -6 at Buffalo
>
> FINALLY a non double digit favorite listing for the Chargers. This pick is
> a no brainer. I don't care if there is a 4 foot BLIZZARD, 20 inches of rain
> or a beautiful day in Western NY, the Chargers are looking to "run the
> table" so they can get homefield throughout the playoffs, or at least until
> they have to face Indy in the post season. If they do run the table, and
> Indy loses a game, all roads to the SuperBowl will pass through San Diego,
> as Baltimore WILL lose tonight vs the Bengals, which gives SD a leg up for
> homefield due to the fact that Baltimore is one of only two teams that have
> beaten the Chargers this season. If they end up with the same record, and
> second to Indy, Baltimore has the tie-breaker due to the heads up victory.
> I wanted to look at the O/U in this game, but being played in Buffalo, Lake
> Effect snow could really damper the long game, even though LT will run
> through snow banks to get another 100+ yd game, the passing game could be
> slowed down. 43.5 is huge when weather can be that big a factor. So avoid
> the O/U unless the forecast calls for sunny skies and temps in the 50's then
> jump all over the OVER, but I'm not using that as one of my 5 picks this
> week.
>
> ****
>
> ====LOSS: SD gave up a dumb TD drive late in the 4th quarter although they
> dominated the game throughout, therefore NOT covering the 6 pts, but winning
> nonetheless and now having the best record in the league, along with
> Indianapolis.
>
> ****
>
> SEA +3 at DEN AND Seattle +172 (pinnacle)
>
> Jay Cutler is now the sheep being thrown to the wolves for the first time in
> his career. It seems Shanahan has given up all hope of making the SuperBowl
> this year, as Jake Plummer, depite his dismal performance over the past few
> weeks, has a WINNING RECORD as the Denver QB. I don't believe even the 10
> day break between games is enough time to prepare Cutler to play a very
> important home game that could determine whether or not the Broncos make the
> playoffs.
>
> The Injury reports don't bode well for the Bronco's either, as they've lost
> strarting OT Matt Lepsis and starting DE Courtney Brown for the season to
> knee injuries, Tatum Bell is still having turf toe problems , and two
> Saftey's Ferguson and Brandon are on IR. This will be HUGE for Matt
> Hasselbeck who himself is on the injury list with "something broken" on his
> NON-THROWING hand. Hasselbeck will be starting and be extremely effective
> now that Denver has lost two in the secondary and one good pass rusher.
> I'll say it again, as I said when Denver hosted SD. They are only favored
> because they're at home. IMHO, Mile High Mystique is OVER for at least the
> rest of this season. They had a great shot at making the playoffs as a
> wildcard, but now they're putting that in jeopardy to bring in the "future"
> QB in the middle of a playoff race. Seattle should be the favorite in this
> game, which is why I'm using two picks on this game with the spread and the
> money line.
>
> ****
>
> ====WIN On the Point Spread, which I said was a no-brainer, and
> ====WIN On the money line. You heard it here first! Seattle would WIN
> outright! Denver gave up on their chances to make the playoffs last night,
> let alone their "super-hopes". Shanahan may have made a very wise decision
> for the future, but I believe Palmer could have been much more effective
> against the 'Hawks. So count up TWO MORE WINS on my card here.
>
>
> ****
> HOU +3 at OAK
>
> Let's face it folks, this is not the "game of the week" by any means. I've
> got one thing to say. "I'm beginning to like Houston's future". They seem
> to get it together at just the right times and David Carr, if surrounded by
> a better team, has the potential to be a superstar QB. Oakland, on the other
> hand is still the most penalized, and most demoralized team in the leauge.
> Randy Moss is POISON and the Raiders have ingested that poison (for at least
> the rest of this season) asking for a trade in the middle of last week. No
> other team in the leauge wants to touch him at the moment, so with Jerry
> Porter out, who will they throw to? If I were the linemaker, I would have
> this game at Hou -2, even though they *are* Houston and playing on the road,
> but the Raiduhs are so damned bad this year, and have so many internal
> problems in the front office and the locker room that Houston will breeze
> into Oakland and give them yet another embarrassing loss. If not, they will
> at least cover the 3 pt. spread.
>
> ****
>
> ====WIN.....Did you see what I said there? Not only did I think they would
> cover, but outright WIN.... They did. Oakland will have an entirely new
> staff next year, or Al Davis has lost his mind
>
> ****
> My 3 team parlay of the week:
>
> CIN -3
> SD -6
> SEA +6
>
> ****
> ==== LOSS due to SD not covering. Let's face it, SD gave 'em a freebie
>
> For a 4 teamer:
>
> CIN -3
> SD-6
> SEA +172 (money line)
> HOU +3
>
> ====LOSS Same reason as above
>
> ****
> Longshot pick of the week:
>
> While there are two REALLY long shots on the board this week (DET+770 @ NE
> and MN +425 @ CHI) I can't go with either one. I'm picking a smaller
> longshot that I believe can actually happen:
>
> TEN +360 (WSEX) at home to Indy.
>
> ****
> ====WIN... That's FOUR out of FIVE Longshots in the past 5 weeks. Who knows
> how to pick em? huh?
>
>
> There you have it. 5 locks, a 3 and 4 teamer and a longshot.
>
> FINAL TOTAL LOCKS 4 of 5
> PARLAYS 0 of 2
> LONGSHOT 1 of 1
>
> DAMN GOOD WEEK AROUND DAVOICE'S HOUSE!!!!
>
>
Nice job. You would have had a clean sweep if Clinton Hart hadn't
slipped and fumbled while running back an interception of Losman in the
last three minutes of the Chargers/Bills game.
>
> Rick "DaVoice" Charles
|
| |
Date: 04 Dec 19:29:14
From: freakinfoldalready
Subject: Re: OT NFL WEEK 13
|
well friend without going into details of what you pointed out to me in regards
to SD and BUFF game, i told you that taking the homedawgs was the way to go.
i played exactly what i said i would, all hometown dogs except TENN (oops) and
my 3 team teaser. i went 4-1 on the weekend.
i opted to tak the other side of the PHI game today andlose the juice as i cant
see me winning that one.
4-1 is a good weekend. Freebie for BUFF? face it, SD blew a huge lead for that
to even come into play.
On Dec 4 2006 2:01 PM, DaVoice wrote:
> Well. Let's take a look at my picks this weekend and see how well I did:
>
> ****
> Wow did I suck last week! Chargers didn't cover, Denver lost to KC AND the
> score stuck at 30 when I picked over 37.5 and on and on. This was by far my
> worst week this year. Thankfully, I had no bankroll to place BIG bets and
> didn't lose much.
>
>
> With that said, I think there are some better games to pick this weekend. I
> was going to stay away from Tonight's (Thur) game, but can't because of a
> significant injury problem:
>
> CIN - 3 at home to BAL
>
> Jamal Lewis is still having foot problems and Baltimore has his listed as
> questionable while "Ocho-Cinco" and the Bengals are just getting better week
> after week. I think Lewis will probably start and if he's ineffective will
> see limited touches, when plays right into the Bengals Defensive gameplan.
> The Ravens have one helluva Defense, but Palmer and the boys are really
> coming together to put points on the board. I don't know if it *will* be a
> blowout, but I suspect the 3 pt spread may be very low. JUMP ON IT, lay the
> 3 and take the home team Bengals. Mortal lock.
>
> By the way, for those of you who don't have the luxury of the NFL Network
> and don't live in either of those markets, you can always follow the game at
> http://www.nfl.com/scores Then go to the game and click GAME CENTER. They
> have a graphic representation of the game that updates with every play which
> is a free service. And they give you the option of paying $9.95 (or
> something like that) to listen to the radio pbp of the games from either
> home team's broadcast
>
> ****
>
> ====WIN. There was no question in my mind about this game. To all of you
> nay-sayers, bwahahahaha
>
> ****
> SD -6 at Buffalo
>
> FINALLY a non double digit favorite listing for the Chargers. This pick is
> a no brainer. I don't care if there is a 4 foot BLIZZARD, 20 inches of rain
> or a beautiful day in Western NY, the Chargers are looking to "run the
> table" so they can get homefield throughout the playoffs, or at least until
> they have to face Indy in the post season. If they do run the table, and
> Indy loses a game, all roads to the SuperBowl will pass through San Diego,
> as Baltimore WILL lose tonight vs the Bengals, which gives SD a leg up for
> homefield due to the fact that Baltimore is one of only two teams that have
> beaten the Chargers this season. If they end up with the same record, and
> second to Indy, Baltimore has the tie-breaker due to the heads up victory.
> I wanted to look at the O/U in this game, but being played in Buffalo, Lake
> Effect snow could really damper the long game, even though LT will run
> through snow banks to get another 100+ yd game, the passing game could be
> slowed down. 43.5 is huge when weather can be that big a factor. So avoid
> the O/U unless the forecast calls for sunny skies and temps in the 50's then
> jump all over the OVER, but I'm not using that as one of my 5 picks this
> week.
>
> ****
>
> ====LOSS: SD gave up a dumb TD drive late in the 4th quarter although they
> dominated the game throughout, therefore NOT covering the 6 pts, but winning
> nonetheless and now having the best record in the league, along with
> Indianapolis.
>
> ****
>
> SEA +3 at DEN AND Seattle +172 (pinnacle)
>
> Jay Cutler is now the sheep being thrown to the wolves for the first time in
> his career. It seems Shanahan has given up all hope of making the SuperBowl
> this year, as Jake Plummer, depite his dismal performance over the past few
> weeks, has a WINNING RECORD as the Denver QB. I don't believe even the 10
> day break between games is enough time to prepare Cutler to play a very
> important home game that could determine whether or not the Broncos make the
> playoffs.
>
> The Injury reports don't bode well for the Bronco's either, as they've lost
> strarting OT Matt Lepsis and starting DE Courtney Brown for the season to
> knee injuries, Tatum Bell is still having turf toe problems , and two
> Saftey's Ferguson and Brandon are on IR. This will be HUGE for Matt
> Hasselbeck who himself is on the injury list with "something broken" on his
> NON-THROWING hand. Hasselbeck will be starting and be extremely effective
> now that Denver has lost two in the secondary and one good pass rusher.
> I'll say it again, as I said when Denver hosted SD. They are only favored
> because they're at home. IMHO, Mile High Mystique is OVER for at least the
> rest of this season. They had a great shot at making the playoffs as a
> wildcard, but now they're putting that in jeopardy to bring in the "future"
> QB in the middle of a playoff race. Seattle should be the favorite in this
> game, which is why I'm using two picks on this game with the spread and the
> money line.
>
> ****
>
> ====WIN On the Point Spread, which I said was a no-brainer, and
> ====WIN On the money line. You heard it here first! Seattle would WIN
> outright! Denver gave up on their chances to make the playoffs last night,
> let alone their "super-hopes". Shanahan may have made a very wise decision
> for the future, but I believe Palmer could have been much more effective
> against the 'Hawks. So count up TWO MORE WINS on my card here.
>
>
> ****
> HOU +3 at OAK
>
> Let's face it folks, this is not the "game of the week" by any means. I've
> got one thing to say. "I'm beginning to like Houston's future". They seem
> to get it together at just the right times and David Carr, if surrounded by
> a better team, has the potential to be a superstar QB. Oakland, on the other
> hand is still the most penalized, and most demoralized team in the leauge.
> Randy Moss is POISON and the Raiders have ingested that poison (for at least
> the rest of this season) asking for a trade in the middle of last week. No
> other team in the leauge wants to touch him at the moment, so with Jerry
> Porter out, who will they throw to? If I were the linemaker, I would have
> this game at Hou -2, even though they *are* Houston and playing on the road,
> but the Raiduhs are so damned bad this year, and have so many internal
> problems in the front office and the locker room that Houston will breeze
> into Oakland and give them yet another embarrassing loss. If not, they will
> at least cover the 3 pt. spread.
>
> ****
>
> ====WIN.....Did you see what I said there? Not only did I think they would
> cover, but outright WIN.... They did. Oakland will have an entirely new
> staff next year, or Al Davis has lost his mind
>
> ****
> My 3 team parlay of the week:
>
> CIN -3
> SD -6
> SEA +6
>
> ****
> ==== LOSS due to SD not covering. Let's face it, SD gave 'em a freebie
>
> For a 4 teamer:
>
> CIN -3
> SD-6
> SEA +172 (money line)
> HOU +3
>
> ====LOSS Same reason as above
>
> ****
> Longshot pick of the week:
>
> While there are two REALLY long shots on the board this week (DET+770 @ NE
> and MN +425 @ CHI) I can't go with either one. I'm picking a smaller
> longshot that I believe can actually happen:
>
> TEN +360 (WSEX) at home to Indy.
>
> ****
> ====WIN... That's FOUR out of FIVE Longshots in the past 5 weeks. Who knows
> how to pick em? huh?
>
>
> There you have it. 5 locks, a 3 and 4 teamer and a longshot.
>
> FINAL TOTAL LOCKS 4 of 5
> PARLAYS 0 of 2
> LONGSHOT 1 of 1
>
> DAMN GOOD WEEK AROUND DAVOICE'S HOUSE!!!!
>
>
>
> Rick "DaVoice" Charles
_______________________________________________________________
Your Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | |
Date: 04 Dec 2006 12:00:21
From: DaVoice
Subject: Re: OT NFL WEEK 13
|
"freakinfoldalready" <43085980@recpoker.com > wrote in message
news:1165260554$916163@recpoker.com...
>
> well friend without going into details of what you pointed out to me in
> regards
> to SD and BUFF game, i told you that taking the homedawgs was the way to
> go.
>
> i played exactly what i said i would, all hometown dogs except TENN (oops)
> and
> my 3 team teaser. i went 4-1 on the weekend.
>
> i opted to tak the other side of the PHI game today andlose the juice as i
> cant
> see me winning that one.
>
> 4-1 is a good weekend. Freebie for BUFF? face it, SD blew a huge lead for
> that
> to even come into play.
You were absolutely right about the 51% on home dawgs, I never agrued that.
I did think SD would cover, and that's where I thought you were wrong,
that's all. SD did basically play "martyball" again this week, which they
hadn't for the past 4 and that's why they didn't cover. No excuses, but had
they not let Buff get the easy TD late, I would have won EVERY bet I made
this weekend including my 3 and 4 teamers.
RC
|
| | | |
Date: 05 Dec
From: freakinfoldalready
Subject: Re: OT NFL WEEK 13
|
in all fairness aftet the first half i wrote off all my bets and my teaser.
next week i must admit that i dont like any dawgs at all. i will give you my
picks on thursday.
i did take the other half of tonites game and paid no juice bc PHI is just that
bad
On Dec 4 2006 3:00 PM, DaVoice wrote:
> "freakinfoldalready" <43085980@recpoker.com> wrote in message
> news:1165260554$916163@recpoker.com...
> >
> > well friend without going into details of what you pointed out to me in
> > regards
> > to SD and BUFF game, i told you that taking the homedawgs was the way to
> > go.
> >
> > i played exactly what i said i would, all hometown dogs except TENN (oops)
> > and
> > my 3 team teaser. i went 4-1 on the weekend.
> >
> > i opted to tak the other side of the PHI game today andlose the juice as i
> > cant
> > see me winning that one.
> >
> > 4-1 is a good weekend. Freebie for BUFF? face it, SD blew a huge lead for
> > that
> > to even come into play.
>
> You were absolutely right about the 51% on home dawgs, I never agrued that.
> I did think SD would cover, and that's where I thought you were wrong,
> that's all. SD did basically play "martyball" again this week, which they
> hadn't for the past 4 and that's why they didn't cover. No excuses, but had
> they not let Buff get the easy TD late, I would have won EVERY bet I made
> this weekend including my 3 and 4 teamers.
>
> RC
_______________________________________________________________
Watch Lists, Block Lists, Favorites - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | |
Date: 05 Dec 15:16:32
From: freakinfoldalready
Subject: Re: OT NFL WEEK 13
|
early thsi week i am thinking of hammering NE against MIA. I know it is
contrarian to the home dawgs theory but NE coming off a bad game could fire them
up and MIA has Sammy "who?" Morris running while Brown is hurt. LIne at 3 here
i believe.
On Dec 4 2006 3:00 PM, DaVoice wrote:
> "freakinfoldalready" <43085980@recpoker.com> wrote in message
> news:1165260554$916163@recpoker.com...
> >
> > well friend without going into details of what you pointed out to me in
> > regards
> > to SD and BUFF game, i told you that taking the homedawgs was the way to
> > go.
> >
> > i played exactly what i said i would, all hometown dogs except TENN (oops)
> > and
> > my 3 team teaser. i went 4-1 on the weekend.
> >
> > i opted to tak the other side of the PHI game today andlose the juice as i
> > cant
> > see me winning that one.
> >
> > 4-1 is a good weekend. Freebie for BUFF? face it, SD blew a huge lead for
> > that
> > to even come into play.
>
> You were absolutely right about the 51% on home dawgs, I never agrued that.
> I did think SD would cover, and that's where I thought you were wrong,
> that's all. SD did basically play "martyball" again this week, which they
> hadn't for the past 4 and that's why they didn't cover. No excuses, but had
> they not let Buff get the easy TD late, I would have won EVERY bet I made
> this weekend including my 3 and 4 teamers.
>
> RC
_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| |
Date: 04 Dec 19:28:03
From: Mr. Peoples
Subject: Re: OT NFL WEEK 13
|
You're such a fool. Hasn't anyone told you that the NFL is fixed? It's right
up there with Pro Wrestling and the UFC. The action is real in that they get
hurt but the outcomes are PREDETERMINED.
I've known Joe Montana for two decades so this makes me an authority to make
fiction into fact.
_______________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | |
Date: 04 Dec 2006 16:48:22
From: eleaticus
Subject: Re: OT NFL WEEK 13
|
"Mr. Peoples" <43086600@recpoker.com > wrote in message
news:1165260483$916159@recpoker.com...
>
> You're such a fool. Hasn't anyone told you that the NFL is fixed?
That's a ridiculous pair of sentences.
It makes no difference whether the games are fixed or not. If you can pick
the winners with no fix in or fix-in but not knowing what it is, same
result.
--
eleaticus
ee-lee-AT-i-cus
eleaticus@bellsouth.net
|
| | | |
Date: 06 Dec
From: Mr. Peoples
Subject: Re: OT NFL WEEK 13
|
What's even more ridiculous is how you're commenting on an inside joke. Anyone
with half a brain understands the remarks I made aren't real.
_______________________________________________________________
New Feature: Mark All As Read! - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | |
Date: 04 Dec 2006 12:01:55
From: DaVoice
Subject: Re: OT NFL WEEK 13
|
"Mr. Peoples" <43086600@recpoker.com > wrote in message
news:1165260483$916159@recpoker.com...
>
> You're such a fool. Hasn't anyone told you that the NFL is fixed? It's
> right
> up there with Pro Wrestling and the UFC. The action is real in that they
> get
> hurt but the outcomes are PREDETERMINED.
>
> I've known Joe Montana for two decades so this makes me an authority to
> make
> fiction into fact.
Touche, but go ahead and keep believing what you wish. I look at the UFC as
great entertainment because it hasn't become a soap opera yet.
RC
|
|
