I'm playing NE.
I know they look like shit and I am worried about my bet tonight.
Two things though:
1. I cannot lay points with a Marvin Lewis coached team on the road, let alone in prime time on the road.
2. I will put my money on a HOF Coach & QB, that were just embarrassed on national TV a week before and are now playing at home.
I know NE looks awful. I am trusting that Bill & Co, will have these guys playing with heart and passion tonight. They have too much pride! Just my opinion.
I know they look like shit and I am worried about my bet tonight.
Two things though:
1. I cannot lay points with a Marvin Lewis coached team on the road, let alone in prime time on the road.
2. I will put my money on a HOF Coach & QB, that were just embarrassed on national TV a week before and are now playing at home.
I know NE looks awful. I am trusting that Bill & Co, will have these guys playing with heart and passion tonight. They have too much pride! Just my opinion.
I agree with everyone here. Cincinnati is complete and a top-tier team. New England has serious weaknesses that cannot be fixed in one week. Yet I buy in to the "New-England-doesn't-lose-back-to-back-games-in-the-Belichek/Brady-era" narrative. Fellas, I haven't been doing this as long as most (5 years), but I've quickly learned crazy things can happen and the better team rarely wins.
Really? Explain what you mean by everything? What relevant stats are you looking at? The past history stuff is kinda silly to me (completely illogical...not the same players so why would any one care what happened years ago).
Why? What logic do you use to ascertain that? Why must someone be "due" to win if the surrounding cast doesn't support a cohesive unit? I would really hate to actually put money on a game using that type of reasoning (whether you're right or not).
