Jump to content

ehfeuh57

Community Member
  • Posts

    746
  • Joined

Posts posted by ehfeuh57

  1. It doesn't have to be helmet to helmet to get ejected. You can be ejected for anything and this qualified.

     

    Like unnecessary roughness can be for anything and at a higher degree of egregiousness can turn into an ejection. The ref does not have to prove it was a Legal or Illegal hit. That's why he did it so fast without even reviewing because he no longer cared whether the hit was legal. He just deemed it unnecessary to a high degree on the spot.

    • Dislike 1
  2. On 11/10/2022 at 11:43 PM, gridirongold said:

    Ok then I won't make any more points in retort. You'll figure it out. I don't need to educate against your pompous attitude 

     

    I already knew that, it was simply left out and I was just being nice. So, your statement is invalid.

    • Agree 1
  3. On 11/8/2022 at 10:52 PM, gridirongold said:

    No man. I don't know what I'm talking about. Not sure what you're talking about? They don't bet on games? Well they take bets. They set numbers. They consider public perception heavily cause they'll have the numbers and the teasers and parlays. Anyone who knows where the line should be was comfortable with the unsexy Geno and Seattle. You hear them in here all the time. I've been laughed at a ton. Most don't know a team like the Jets is pretty good til they see it first....so yes, they are betting.

     

     

    The teasers and parlays are your only good point and that would be the books betting against us.

     

    For the vast majority/all of the other bets however, the bettors are betting against each other and the books are taking in the rake. And also this is what the line is set for(to get even money on both sides). And this line is used for teasers and parlays.

  4. On 11/7/2022 at 2:18 PM, gridirongold said:

    Public underdogs aren't very wise investments without a team being superior...example Seattle at Arizona yesterday, books took a bath on that game.

    You use a lot of buzz words but do you know what you are talking about?

     

    you say "Public underdogs are not a wise investment" then you cite Seattle who was an underdog vs Arizona and won the game outright

     

    you have no proof the books took a bath. Ive said this again and again they do not bet on the games and do not like to expose themselves willingly. you would have to come with proof to say otherwise.

    5 minutes ago, newcam2012 said:

    Time for me to put some money on the Dolphins and Bengals. No way am I laying money on +275 for Buffalo. Those odds suck. Not saying Buffalo won't win it just saying from a betting point of view those odds aren't good. 

     

    the favorite to win a championship in any sport is generally a bad bet (-EV)

×
×
  • Create New...