WEBVTT - Best NFL Week 5 Bets + Favorite Props (Ep. 15) 0:00:07.680 --> 0:00:11.280 Hey everyone, and welcome back to the Betting Pros NFL Podcast, 0:00:11.360 --> 0:00:14.000 brought to you by bet MGM. I'm your host, Dan 0:00:14.040 --> 0:00:16.040 Harris and you can find me on Twitter at Dan 0:00:16.120 --> 0:00:18.520 Harris Adi. It's time to break down some of our 0:00:18.600 --> 0:00:20.880 favorite and our least favorite bets for the Week five 0:00:20.960 --> 0:00:23.239 NFL Slate, and with me to talk about it all 0:00:23.360 --> 0:00:26.280 is Greg Smith, co founder of two qbs dot com, 0:00:26.320 --> 0:00:29.280 writer and podcaster for four for four dot com, one 0:00:29.320 --> 0:00:31.800 of the most accurate sports betters in the Bettingpros dot 0:00:31.800 --> 0:00:35.599 Com Accuracy Challenge, and most notably the man who narrowly 0:00:35.640 --> 0:00:37.720 lost to me in the semi finals of the Scott 0:00:37.800 --> 0:00:40.280 Fishbowl last season. You can find him on Twitter at 0:00:40.360 --> 0:00:43.000 Greg Sauce. It is about time we got to talk, Greg. 0:00:43.040 --> 0:00:43.800 How the heck are YEA? 0:00:44.000 --> 0:00:46.159 I'm doing all right? Man. That's some sick rubbins you 0:00:46.280 --> 0:00:48.640 just got on the I mean fishball beating. It gave me. 0:00:48.720 --> 0:00:50.080 But I was I was in it, man, I was 0:00:50.120 --> 0:00:52.199 in there for for a long time. I'm proud I 0:00:52.240 --> 0:00:53.720 made it as far as I did, but man, you 0:00:53.920 --> 0:00:55.440 came so close to winning it all. 0:00:55.720 --> 0:00:58.000 I really appreciate that I did. I definitely do not 0:00:58.080 --> 0:00:59.720 lose sleep over the fact that had I just started 0:00:59.720 --> 0:01:02.440 to see Anderson, I would have been the champion for 0:01:02.560 --> 0:01:05.560 the scott Fish Bowl eight. I'm definitely not bitter about 0:01:05.560 --> 0:01:07.080 it at all. But we had a lot of fun 0:01:07.160 --> 0:01:09.760 doing that, and you know, I know you're in it 0:01:09.760 --> 0:01:12.160 again this year. Hopefully things will turn out just a 0:01:12.240 --> 0:01:15.360 smidge better for both of us. So look, for a 0:01:15.400 --> 0:01:17.600 while there, I checked it out. You were, I believe, 0:01:17.760 --> 0:01:20.959 leading the accuracy competition in our Betting pros dot com chowns. 0:01:21.040 --> 0:01:22.840 Was that right or you were one or two right before? 0:01:23.000 --> 0:01:25.520 Yeah, I came out real hot in the first three weeks. 0:01:25.720 --> 0:01:29.400 I was definitely number one in percentage of correct picks, 0:01:29.959 --> 0:01:32.760 and I was just a little bit behind after week 0:01:32.800 --> 0:01:35.440 three in terms of units one I I was just 0:01:35.480 --> 0:01:37.640 barely behind somebody else. And forgive me for forgetting that 0:01:37.640 --> 0:01:39.880 person's name. I would say, look it up on bettingpros 0:01:39.920 --> 0:01:42.360 dot com. But yeah, I had a really good run 0:01:42.400 --> 0:01:45.080 for the first three weeks, and then week four, the 0:01:45.120 --> 0:01:47.240 great equalizer came crashing back down to earth. That's just 0:01:47.319 --> 0:01:48.320 kind of how it goes sometimes. 0:01:48.560 --> 0:01:51.040 Yeah, you and me and a lot of betters out there. 0:01:51.080 --> 0:01:53.680 Week four was a real tough one and full disclosure, 0:01:53.720 --> 0:01:55.640 because we had been on a pretty good run here 0:01:55.680 --> 0:01:58.880 on this podcast, I certainly got a few wrong last week. 0:01:58.920 --> 0:02:01.240 I was wrong on both the Pats laying seven to 0:02:01.280 --> 0:02:03.440 the Bills, which by the way, was perhaps the most 0:02:03.480 --> 0:02:05.640 annoying game I've ever seen because the Pats had about 0:02:05.640 --> 0:02:08.280 fifty chances to cover but just couldn't get those extra 0:02:08.320 --> 0:02:10.560 two points. I was also wrong in the Cardinals getting 0:02:10.600 --> 0:02:12.799 six from the Seahawks, as well as my Marlon Mack 0:02:13.120 --> 0:02:15.480 prop bet. Now I did hit on the Panthers Texans 0:02:15.480 --> 0:02:17.320 coming in under forty seven and a half, so not 0:02:17.400 --> 0:02:19.959 a complete wipeout, and our guest jj Epersina had a 0:02:19.960 --> 0:02:22.519 pretty nice weekend, actually nailing three of his four bets. 0:02:22.800 --> 0:02:24.720 So let's both go for the clean sweeper. Are you 0:02:24.800 --> 0:02:25.440 good with that? Greg? 0:02:25.639 --> 0:02:27.200 Sounds good to me. Let's do it all right. 0:02:27.280 --> 0:02:29.440 As always, We're gonna get started here with pick six, 0:02:29.560 --> 0:02:31.400 where both Greg and I are going to give three 0:02:31.440 --> 0:02:33.880 of our favorite bets for this weekend, either against the 0:02:33.919 --> 0:02:36.280 spread or on the over under. And as always, I 0:02:36.320 --> 0:02:38.760 will note at the outset that we're recording this shortly 0:02:38.840 --> 0:02:41.840 before the Thursday night game between the Rams and the Seahawks, 0:02:41.919 --> 0:02:44.200 so we will not be making any picks on that game, 0:02:44.360 --> 0:02:46.919 But if you want to see how I or Greg 0:02:46.960 --> 0:02:49.520 picked that game, you can go to Bettingpros dot com. 0:02:49.520 --> 0:02:51.840 That's gonna show you how I and every betting expert 0:02:51.840 --> 0:02:54.080 who makes picks on the site made their picks for 0:02:54.120 --> 0:02:56.480 every game. We're also going to be using the bettingpros 0:02:56.480 --> 0:02:59.400 dot com consensus odds and making our picks. Those are 0:02:59.480 --> 0:03:02.320 the aggrig at odds that you'll find available in the market. 0:03:02.639 --> 0:03:04.639 All right, Greg, start us off. What's your first pick here? 0:03:05.080 --> 0:03:08.560 So I'm taking Baltimore minus three at Pittsburgh. The Steelers 0:03:08.560 --> 0:03:10.880 are on a short week after playing on Monday Night Football, 0:03:10.960 --> 0:03:13.880 and they have an average point differential of minus three 0:03:13.919 --> 0:03:16.960 point zero through four weeks. And meanwhile, Baltimore has an 0:03:16.960 --> 0:03:20.400 average point differential of plus eight point eight points. So 0:03:20.560 --> 0:03:23.320 even if home field is worth three points, that should 0:03:23.320 --> 0:03:25.280 still put the Ravens as bigger favorites. In my mind, 0:03:25.320 --> 0:03:27.600 I expected a larger spread here. It actually started at 0:03:27.760 --> 0:03:30.960 three point five. It's been bet down to three. I 0:03:31.040 --> 0:03:32.560 liked it at three and a half. I like it 0:03:32.600 --> 0:03:35.680 even more at three. So I'm really into this line, 0:03:35.680 --> 0:03:37.760 this pick. If you want to go deeper on kind 0:03:37.760 --> 0:03:39.880 of the efficiency metrics for these two teams. I like 0:03:39.920 --> 0:03:43.080 to use DVA from football outsiders, and it's all more 0:03:43.080 --> 0:03:46.400 good news for Baltimore. The Ravens ranked fifth in total DVA, 0:03:46.520 --> 0:03:48.960 the Steelers ranked twenty fourth. The Ravens have the third 0:03:49.000 --> 0:03:52.400 best offense, sixth in passing efficiency, and first in rushing efficiency. 0:03:52.640 --> 0:03:55.680 The Steelers ranked nineteenth in defense, nineteenth against the past, 0:03:55.720 --> 0:03:58.080 twentieth against the run, and in the running game, there 0:03:58.120 --> 0:04:01.040 is a huge mismatch in the trenches. Pittsburgh D line 0:04:01.080 --> 0:04:03.960 ranks twenty eighth in adjusted line yards. Baltimore's O line 0:04:04.040 --> 0:04:06.760 ranks second. So either the Steelers are going to get 0:04:06.800 --> 0:04:09.440 run over by mark Ingram and Gus Edwards and Lamar Jackson, 0:04:09.760 --> 0:04:11.240 or the Steelers are going to have to sell out 0:04:11.240 --> 0:04:13.640 against the run and risk getting burned by Marcus Brown 0:04:13.640 --> 0:04:16.240 and the rest of the receivers in that receiving core 0:04:16.320 --> 0:04:18.599 for Baltimore. And on that note, I know we're going 0:04:18.680 --> 0:04:21.640 to get to player props later, but I like taking 0:04:21.920 --> 0:04:24.400 Marquise Brown to top one hundred receiving yards at plus 0:04:24.440 --> 0:04:26.480 two thirty five on points bet. I'm not going to 0:04:26.520 --> 0:04:29.039 make that my official player prop for this podcast. I'll 0:04:29.080 --> 0:04:31.360 save that one for later, because I do think there 0:04:31.400 --> 0:04:33.359 is some risk that the running game goes hand for 0:04:33.400 --> 0:04:35.400 Baltimore and they just might not need to pass that 0:04:35.520 --> 0:04:38.280 much either way, I just don't trust Mason Rudolph to 0:04:38.360 --> 0:04:39.919 keep up on the other side of the ball. So 0:04:39.960 --> 0:04:41.320 I love the Ravens minus three. 0:04:41.480 --> 0:04:44.719 Well, first of all, I appreciate you not completely ruining 0:04:44.760 --> 0:04:46.640 the way I like to structure this show by giving 0:04:46.680 --> 0:04:48.400 away your top prop. But that is nice that you 0:04:48.480 --> 0:04:51.080 added on a bonus. There a couple things here. I 0:04:51.279 --> 0:04:52.839 first of all, I agree with you. When I look 0:04:52.880 --> 0:04:56.600 at the line generally, it just it screams to me Baltimore. 0:04:56.640 --> 0:04:59.040 I'm a little surprised because I'm looking at our consensus breakdown. 0:04:59.080 --> 0:05:02.200 Fifty seven percent of experts are going here with Pittsburgh. Now, 0:05:02.200 --> 0:05:04.240 some of them got in probably when it was closer 0:05:04.279 --> 0:05:06.919 to four, because the consensus has moved a bit. But 0:05:07.000 --> 0:05:09.440 I'm a little bit surprised by that. The one thing 0:05:09.440 --> 0:05:11.080 that makes me a little hesitant about this, and I'm 0:05:11.080 --> 0:05:13.880 wondering whether or not this factor's into at all. Team. 0:05:14.000 --> 0:05:15.839 I know they have, you know, new offenses. I know 0:05:15.960 --> 0:05:18.919 Roethlisberger's not there, and Lamar Jackson's obviously new, and so 0:05:19.000 --> 0:05:22.800 everything's a little different. Every time these teams play, it's 0:05:22.839 --> 0:05:25.400 basically a close game. Half their games, you know, over 0:05:25.440 --> 0:05:29.480 the last several seasons, basically are decided by three points exactly. 0:05:29.560 --> 0:05:31.640 So does that type of history factor in it all 0:05:31.680 --> 0:05:33.080 or do you just throw it out because it's an 0:05:33.240 --> 0:05:35.360 entirely new sort of set of circumstances here. 0:05:35.440 --> 0:05:37.720 Yeah, new teams, and most importantly, it's a new quarterback 0:05:37.720 --> 0:05:39.360 for Pittsburgh. Like all those other games are played with 0:05:39.360 --> 0:05:41.480 Ben Roethlisberger, this one's played with Mason Rudolph. That's a 0:05:41.520 --> 0:05:44.040 huge deal. Like that's a major downgrade, especially if you've 0:05:44.040 --> 0:05:46.920 been watching mesro Rudolph over the past few weeks. He's 0:05:46.960 --> 0:05:50.039 looked serviceable. He's a game manager type so far, but 0:05:50.120 --> 0:05:51.880 has he looked good no way. Has he been able 0:05:51.920 --> 0:05:53.480 to push the ball down the field, not at all. 0:05:53.800 --> 0:05:56.359 I don't trust him in this matchup whatsoever against a 0:05:56.400 --> 0:05:58.880 good coach, a good team in Baltimore, and I just 0:05:58.920 --> 0:06:01.120 think they're gonna get run off the fie. Now, if the 0:06:01.160 --> 0:06:03.800 line was four or five points, I'd be a little 0:06:03.800 --> 0:06:05.760 bit more hesitant. But if all Baltimore has to do 0:06:05.880 --> 0:06:09.440 is win, by field goal. I think that's very easily doable. 0:06:09.640 --> 0:06:11.880 I'm a little bit surprised that the line is here. 0:06:12.000 --> 0:06:13.839 I mean, I'll be honest. Again, that gives me a 0:06:13.880 --> 0:06:16.360 little bit of pause, just because again it's a divisional game. 0:06:16.360 --> 0:06:18.719 They're always a little bit scary, and the fact that 0:06:18.760 --> 0:06:20.960 the teams know each other well, even though the offenses 0:06:20.960 --> 0:06:23.760 are different in different quarterbacks. Of course, really, for me, 0:06:24.000 --> 0:06:25.960 Pittsburgh didn't look that good. I know, they ran all 0:06:26.000 --> 0:06:28.920 over since Cincinnati. I mean, first of all, any Andy 0:06:29.000 --> 0:06:32.800 Dalton led team in primetime is basically a guarantee to collapse. 0:06:32.839 --> 0:06:34.680 But you know, the Bengals really aren't good, and it 0:06:34.760 --> 0:06:37.320 was very gimmicky to me, right, I mean, it was 0:06:37.360 --> 0:06:39.920 a lot of wildcat a lot of short passes. I 0:06:40.000 --> 0:06:42.039 just do not see them being able to replicate that 0:06:42.120 --> 0:06:44.279 again against Baltimore. So I don't think I've made my 0:06:44.320 --> 0:06:47.000 official pick on the site yet. I certainly lean that way. 0:06:47.040 --> 0:06:48.960 It gave me a little bit of pause because of 0:06:49.000 --> 0:06:50.880 the fact that the teams know each other so well. 0:06:50.880 --> 0:06:54.640 They're almost always within three points. They're certainly almost legitimately 0:06:54.720 --> 0:06:57.520 every time basically within one score. But certainly, if I 0:06:57.600 --> 0:06:59.480 lean one way, I'm inclined to agree with you there. 0:06:59.839 --> 0:07:04.160 I agree on Baltimore laying three my first bet. Now, 0:07:04.440 --> 0:07:06.400 if you listen to the Monday show where we give 0:07:06.400 --> 0:07:09.159 our initial reactions to the lines, then you'll probably know 0:07:09.200 --> 0:07:11.440 that I'm going to be taking the Vikings laying five 0:07:11.480 --> 0:07:13.960 to the Giants. Now, there are a couple of things here. 0:07:14.480 --> 0:07:17.640 The bettingpros dot Com expert consensus rankers are pretty much 0:07:17.680 --> 0:07:19.800 split down the middle of this game. They slightly lean 0:07:19.880 --> 0:07:22.560 towards Minnesota. It's fifty four percent to fifty six percent. 0:07:22.720 --> 0:07:23.520 Well, we've also got. 0:07:23.440 --> 0:07:26.000 A thing where we show you how the most accurate rankers, 0:07:26.040 --> 0:07:28.720 the top twenty percent, and that's both Greg and me, 0:07:28.880 --> 0:07:32.320 we're both in there. That's seventy seven percent are taking 0:07:32.320 --> 0:07:35.160 the Giants, which makes me a little scared. So bear 0:07:35.200 --> 0:07:37.160 that in mind when I say that this is my 0:07:37.240 --> 0:07:40.680 favorite spread on the slate. Now, I'm having trouble personally 0:07:40.920 --> 0:07:43.240 seeing a scenario where this is not a get right 0:07:43.280 --> 0:07:46.640 game for Minnesota. They are coming off this horrible, embarrassing 0:07:46.640 --> 0:07:48.800 loss to the Bears, and now they have losses to 0:07:48.960 --> 0:07:51.680 both the Bears and the Packers. They certainly cannot afford 0:07:51.680 --> 0:07:54.120 to lose a game like this. They've obviously struggled with 0:07:54.160 --> 0:07:56.600 their passing game. You've got Adam Theln calling out the 0:07:56.800 --> 0:07:59.200 entire game plan. By the way, you should play Adam 0:07:59.200 --> 0:08:01.520 Feelin and all your dear lineups this week, to be clear. 0:08:01.560 --> 0:08:04.240 But you've got Stefan Diggs basically begging the team to 0:08:04.280 --> 0:08:07.480 trade him. You've got Kirk Cousins apologizing for his terrible play, 0:08:07.480 --> 0:08:10.440 but putting that aside, Cousins is not a terrible quarterback. 0:08:10.560 --> 0:08:13.120 I mean, he's had several terrible matchups, but we know 0:08:13.200 --> 0:08:16.120 that he's competent. And although the Vikings offensive line is 0:08:16.120 --> 0:08:19.160 not great, the Giants have absolutely no pass rush. They're 0:08:19.200 --> 0:08:21.640 twenty fifth in the league against the pass, and they 0:08:21.720 --> 0:08:25.200 really struggle against play action. Genorrah Jenkins is fine, but 0:08:25.320 --> 0:08:27.960 you can't draw conclusions from the way they played against 0:08:27.960 --> 0:08:30.640 the Redskins. Now the Vikings, in addition to I think 0:08:30.880 --> 0:08:33.680 finally here opening up the passing game, they of course 0:08:33.720 --> 0:08:36.080 still have the dominant running game with Dalvin Cook and 0:08:36.120 --> 0:08:38.680 the Giants, who don't have a great run defense anyway, 0:08:38.800 --> 0:08:41.040 just lost Ryan Connelly, one of their linebackers, to a 0:08:41.080 --> 0:08:44.080 torn acl baby Alec Oltletree comes back, but I don't 0:08:44.080 --> 0:08:46.680 think he'd play a full complement of stats anyway. So 0:08:46.960 --> 0:08:48.880 this strikes me as a game in which the Vikings 0:08:48.960 --> 0:08:52.680 offense is gonna look really strong and basically establish themselves. 0:08:52.679 --> 0:08:55.440 And on the other side, I think Daniel Jones probably 0:08:55.440 --> 0:08:58.080 looked better than his end line against the Redskins, but 0:08:58.160 --> 0:09:00.959 he obviously came back to Earth. There's still know Saquon Barkley. 0:09:00.960 --> 0:09:03.160 I don't care about all this nonsense about how they're 0:09:03.200 --> 0:09:05.400 not ruling him out yet if they play him there insane. 0:09:05.600 --> 0:09:07.800 Wayne Goalman is serviceable, but he's not gonna win the 0:09:07.840 --> 0:09:09.960 game for them. I get Golden Tate is coming back 0:09:10.240 --> 0:09:12.040 and that helps, but he's been away from the team 0:09:12.080 --> 0:09:14.920 for about a month, and the Vikings defense is excellent. 0:09:14.920 --> 0:09:17.200 They're seventh in the league in points in yordage allowed 0:09:17.520 --> 0:09:19.760 ever since. Griffin is playing great, Hunter is playing great, 0:09:19.760 --> 0:09:22.960 and Mike Zimmer knows Pat Shermer from his time with 0:09:23.040 --> 0:09:25.520 the Vikings. So I have this awful feeling as I 0:09:25.559 --> 0:09:27.520 look and I see how the most accurate experts are 0:09:27.520 --> 0:09:29.319 going on, and because I love this bet so much, 0:09:29.480 --> 0:09:31.400 I have this awful feeling that there's gonna be a 0:09:31.440 --> 0:09:33.880 ton of like sharp action that comes in late on 0:09:33.960 --> 0:09:36.960 Sunday or something like that, because the bets overall here, 0:09:37.080 --> 0:09:39.840 the money and the number of bets generally are favoring 0:09:39.880 --> 0:09:42.240 the Vikings. But I really don't care. To me, I'm 0:09:42.280 --> 0:09:45.600 taking the Vikings laying five, and I feel pretty good 0:09:45.600 --> 0:09:46.720 about it. I don't know how you feel. 0:09:46.800 --> 0:09:48.719 Now, I'm with you on that. I love the point 0:09:48.760 --> 0:09:50.959 you brought up about how they're not giving up that 0:09:51.000 --> 0:09:53.480 many points. Their point differential is five point three points 0:09:53.480 --> 0:09:56.079 per game. New York is at negative two and a 0:09:56.120 --> 0:09:58.880 half points, so right there you can kind of see 0:09:59.280 --> 0:10:02.800 where that's spread comes from, right to some extent, sure, 0:10:03.280 --> 0:10:06.320 especially factoring in three points for home field. And that's 0:10:06.400 --> 0:10:08.680 my biggest concern here is that you're taking the Vikings 0:10:08.720 --> 0:10:10.960 on the road. But hopefully that means that they are 0:10:10.960 --> 0:10:12.160 going to have to pass a little bit more. They're 0:10:12.200 --> 0:10:13.199 not just going to be able to lean on that 0:10:13.280 --> 0:10:16.600 running game like they normally would. And along those lines, 0:10:16.720 --> 0:10:19.200 I think this is one of those squeaky wheel gets 0:10:19.280 --> 0:10:22.360 the grease sorts of scenarios with Adam Deelan and Stefan Diggs. 0:10:22.559 --> 0:10:23.720 Like I do think they are going to make an 0:10:23.720 --> 0:10:25.199 effort to pass a little bit more and this is 0:10:25.200 --> 0:10:27.200 the perfect match to do it. Like you said, the 0:10:27.240 --> 0:10:29.760 Giants have been pretty bad against the pass, and I 0:10:29.840 --> 0:10:31.560 think this is a get right game for the Vikings. 0:10:31.559 --> 0:10:32.520 I really like this call. 0:10:32.720 --> 0:10:34.440 Yeah, that's exactly how I feel. And I get the 0:10:34.520 --> 0:10:36.720 road thing. Of course they're in New York. But I mean, look, 0:10:36.920 --> 0:10:38.960 I realize they've played so much better at home than 0:10:39.000 --> 0:10:41.000 on the road. But on the road they've placed that 0:10:41.120 --> 0:10:43.640 They've faced the Packers and the Bears. I mean that 0:10:43.679 --> 0:10:47.040 those are two very very strong defenses, you know, especially 0:10:47.040 --> 0:10:49.040 the Packers against the pass, So you know I'm going 0:10:49.120 --> 0:10:50.400 to give them a little bit of a pass for that. 0:10:50.440 --> 0:10:52.440 I just think this is I mean, as much as 0:10:52.480 --> 0:10:54.920 they seem like they might be in disarray, they just 0:10:54.920 --> 0:10:58.160 strike me as a much much better team. And as 0:10:58.240 --> 0:11:00.400 much as I like Daniel Jones and like what I've 0:11:00.440 --> 0:11:02.600 seen from him, I'm not really buying that he's sort 0:11:02.640 --> 0:11:04.320 of going to be this guy who's going to transform 0:11:04.360 --> 0:11:05.920 this team. I think the Vikings win here, and I 0:11:05.920 --> 0:11:07.600 think they win big, So I'll take that. Who's your 0:11:07.640 --> 0:11:08.200 second pick? 0:11:08.520 --> 0:11:10.480 So I'm taking the Titans minus two and a half 0:11:10.520 --> 0:11:13.280 against Buffalo. The Titans are at home average point differential 0:11:13.360 --> 0:11:15.720 for Tennessee is seven point three points and it's three 0:11:15.720 --> 0:11:17.880 point three points for Buffalo. So it should come as 0:11:17.880 --> 0:11:21.120 no surprise that after the line opened at Titans minus 0:11:21.160 --> 0:11:22.880 two and a half, it got bet up to Titans 0:11:22.880 --> 0:11:25.360 minus three. Either way, like, I still like the Titans 0:11:25.360 --> 0:11:28.720 at minus three. If Josh Allen doesn't clear concussion protocol, 0:11:28.720 --> 0:11:30.560 the Bills are going to start Matt Barkley in this game. 0:11:30.920 --> 0:11:32.480 But even if all and play still have a tough 0:11:32.520 --> 0:11:35.520 time against Santassee's defense, they're super balanced against the run. 0:11:35.520 --> 0:11:38.599 They rank thirteenth in DVA and fifth in adjusted lineyards 0:11:38.800 --> 0:11:41.000 against the pass. The Titans ranked twelfth and DVA and 0:11:41.040 --> 0:11:44.240 eighth then adjusted sack rate. Buffalo's defense ranks better in 0:11:44.320 --> 0:11:47.600 overall DVOA, ranking fourth in the NFL, but that's mostly 0:11:47.640 --> 0:11:49.880 due to how excellent their pass defense has been. Their 0:11:49.960 --> 0:11:51.959 rank third, and pass defense dv away the Bills do. 0:11:52.320 --> 0:11:54.360 But the Bills have been much worse against the run, 0:11:54.360 --> 0:11:56.240 where they're ranked twenty fifth in the DVA. So I 0:11:56.240 --> 0:11:57.800 think you got to look for Derek Henry and Dean 0:11:57.880 --> 0:12:00.440 Lewis to do some damage in this contest. All in all, 0:12:00.480 --> 0:12:02.760 I just think these two teams are really close, but 0:12:02.800 --> 0:12:05.000 the Titans are slightly better, and they're playing at home, 0:12:05.040 --> 0:12:08.200 and Buffalo's quarterback is questionable. So give me Tennessee at 0:12:08.280 --> 0:12:09.920 minus two and a half or minus three. 0:12:09.880 --> 0:12:12.720 Out of curiosity. How would you feel about the fact 0:12:12.840 --> 0:12:15.640 if Allan is ruled out and Barkley plays, Because again, 0:12:15.679 --> 0:12:18.280 we know Matt Barkley from his career. He did look, 0:12:18.480 --> 0:12:21.720 you know, decent when he filled in there against the 0:12:21.720 --> 0:12:25.360 Pats and Allen as sort of. He's able to make 0:12:25.400 --> 0:12:28.240 plays with his legs. He's incredibly inaccurate. I mean he 0:12:28.280 --> 0:12:31.520 throws more than an interception per game. Does it significantly 0:12:31.600 --> 0:12:33.800 like strengthen your bet if you find out Parkley? Because 0:12:34.000 --> 0:12:36.240 I'm just gonna say I agree with you. I like 0:12:36.320 --> 0:12:39.280 Tennessee here laying three points. It doesn't really matter to me. 0:12:39.360 --> 0:12:41.600 But I don't feel like it would make a huge 0:12:41.720 --> 0:12:44.680 difference to me necessarily if it were Matt Barkley versus 0:12:44.760 --> 0:12:46.200 Josh Allen. I don't know if you agree with that. 0:12:46.320 --> 0:12:47.680 No, I don't think it would either. I mean, it 0:12:47.720 --> 0:12:51.280 makes some difference, but ultimately these are two sketchy quarterbacks, 0:12:51.480 --> 0:12:55.120 and I would rather than be facing Barkley just because 0:12:55.160 --> 0:12:57.840 he hasn't had all the preseason and practice in real 0:12:57.840 --> 0:12:59.600 game reps for the first few weeks of the season. 0:13:00.080 --> 0:13:02.760 Think that matters, and in general, Tennessee just has a 0:13:02.800 --> 0:13:05.439 way of looking all offenses look really bad, Like look 0:13:05.480 --> 0:13:07.200 what they did to Matt Ryan and the Falcons last 0:13:07.240 --> 0:13:09.600 year or last week. That was one of the few 0:13:09.600 --> 0:13:13.160 games I got right in Week four. So maybe I'm, 0:13:13.720 --> 0:13:15.320 you know, chasing the points here a little bit with 0:13:15.360 --> 0:13:17.760 the Titans because Buffalo's defense is good. Like That's what 0:13:17.800 --> 0:13:19.439 gives me some pause here, is that maybe they just 0:13:19.520 --> 0:13:21.760 keep it close through their defense. It doesn't matter how 0:13:21.760 --> 0:13:24.240 bad their quarterback play is, because it's not like, you know, 0:13:24.280 --> 0:13:27.080 Marcus Mariota is a world beater either. My main concern 0:13:27.120 --> 0:13:29.760 here is whether or not the Mariota will kind of 0:13:29.800 --> 0:13:32.000 shoot himself in the foot in this game against a 0:13:32.000 --> 0:13:34.280 real defense, because last week he wasn't playing that in 0:13:34.320 --> 0:13:36.800 the Falcons. But I like the Titans defense, I like 0:13:36.840 --> 0:13:39.559 their running game, and I think that those two aspects 0:13:39.880 --> 0:13:42.600 of their team line up really well against Buffalo this week. 0:13:42.800 --> 0:13:44.640 Yeah, I agree, certainly. If there is a weakness to 0:13:44.679 --> 0:13:47.719 the Buffalo defense, and again it is really strong, I 0:13:48.040 --> 0:13:51.400 completely undersold it last week when the Pats were going 0:13:51.440 --> 0:13:53.360 in there, and I you know, the way they performed 0:13:53.840 --> 0:13:57.000 was really, really, you know, surprising to me, although probably 0:13:57.040 --> 0:13:58.520 shouldn't have been. But in the end, if you are 0:13:58.520 --> 0:14:00.560 going to attack them, it is probably on the ground. 0:14:00.600 --> 0:14:02.960 And again, just to make it clear, the betters, at 0:14:03.040 --> 0:14:05.200 least on bettingpros dot com, the consensus are with you 0:14:05.280 --> 0:14:07.840 fifty eight percent taking Tennessee here, and of the most 0:14:07.880 --> 0:14:10.839 accurate the top twenty percent, eighty three percent are taking 0:14:10.880 --> 0:14:12.480 the Titans. So that is the way that I am 0:14:12.520 --> 0:14:14.360 leaning as well. So I like that pick. I think 0:14:14.360 --> 0:14:16.360 it's good. I don't have any concerns even if Josh 0:14:16.400 --> 0:14:19.200 Allen plays. So my next pick is that I'm gonna 0:14:19.240 --> 0:14:20.960 go a little over under here, and I'm going to 0:14:21.000 --> 0:14:24.680 go the Broncos and Chargers over forty four and a half. Now, 0:14:24.760 --> 0:14:27.440 I think this might be the first over that I've 0:14:27.440 --> 0:14:29.480 picked on this show. Greg, So you are basically here 0:14:29.520 --> 0:14:32.640 for history. Well, all right, let's do it every time. 0:14:32.680 --> 0:14:34.040 Every time you come in the show, I will pick 0:14:34.040 --> 0:14:35.800 an over. That's my promise to you if you come back. 0:14:36.440 --> 0:14:40.960 Both offenses here have been surprisingly competent, and surprisingly that's 0:14:41.000 --> 0:14:43.480 really for the Broncos. Okay, the Chargers, they sort of 0:14:43.520 --> 0:14:45.560 are what they are, other than on the road against 0:14:45.600 --> 0:14:48.760 the Lions, have been better defensively, frankly than I think 0:14:48.760 --> 0:14:52.240 people myself included expected. They've been able to put up points. 0:14:52.280 --> 0:14:54.280 They're third in the league in passing yards per game, 0:14:54.320 --> 0:14:56.960 fifth and totally yards per game. They'll get Melvin Gordon 0:14:57.000 --> 0:14:58.920 back here. Mike Williams looks like he'll be good to go. 0:14:58.960 --> 0:15:00.520 I know it was limited and pres this today, but 0:15:00.560 --> 0:15:02.280 he does look like he's trending in the right direction. 0:15:02.560 --> 0:15:04.560 There's little reason to think that they'll struggle to move 0:15:04.600 --> 0:15:07.120 the ball against Denver. Everyone knows that the Broncos didn't 0:15:07.120 --> 0:15:09.600 have a sack until last week against the Jaguars. Now 0:15:09.640 --> 0:15:11.840 Bradley Chubb is out for the season. It's skewed a 0:15:11.840 --> 0:15:13.760 bit by the fact that Fournette, you know, had that 0:15:13.880 --> 0:15:16.600 huge game last week. But Denver is thirtieth against the 0:15:16.680 --> 0:15:19.960 run and Chris Harris, Mayshadow, Keenan Allen. That's certainly something 0:15:19.960 --> 0:15:21.840 to consider, But I just don't see anything from the 0:15:21.840 --> 0:15:24.400 Broncos to suggest that their defense is going to be 0:15:24.400 --> 0:15:26.520 able to hold the Chargers in check here. Now, the 0:15:26.520 --> 0:15:28.400 Broncos on the other side of the ball have a 0:15:28.680 --> 0:15:32.160 kind of surprisingly competent offense. I mean, Joe Flacco has 0:15:32.160 --> 0:15:34.280 actually fitting kind of well with the system. He's on 0:15:34.320 --> 0:15:37.000 pace for forty three hundred and four passing yards, just 0:15:37.040 --> 0:15:39.600 a shy off his career best. And remember they've played 0:15:39.600 --> 0:15:42.320 the Bears and the Packers, two very strong defenses. Again, 0:15:42.320 --> 0:15:45.560 as I said earlier, the Packers, particularly against the pass. 0:15:45.640 --> 0:15:48.680 Emmanuel Sanders has made a miraculous recovery from last year's injury. 0:15:48.800 --> 0:15:52.000 Courtland Sutton is very underrated. They have two solid running 0:15:52.000 --> 0:15:55.040 backs in Lindsay and Freeman, and the Chargers, as usual, 0:15:55.080 --> 0:15:57.360 are dealing with a ton of injuries on both sides 0:15:57.400 --> 0:16:00.120 of the ball, especially on defense. They're about middle of 0:16:00.200 --> 0:16:03.280 the road in defense despite playing a lot of struggling offenses. 0:16:03.400 --> 0:16:05.600 It looks like Melvin Ingram might miss this game, further 0:16:05.640 --> 0:16:07.800 weakening that defense. So I expect both teams here to 0:16:07.800 --> 0:16:10.640 be able to top twenty points. So I admit I'm 0:16:10.720 --> 0:16:13.640 slightly nervous at taking an over when it involves the Broncos, 0:16:13.840 --> 0:16:15.880 But here I think that both teams are going to 0:16:15.920 --> 0:16:17.880 be able to move the ball on the opposing defenses, 0:16:17.880 --> 0:16:20.200 So I'm fine with laying some money on over forty 0:16:20.200 --> 0:16:20.760 four and a half. 0:16:20.920 --> 0:16:24.080 Yeah, soe. My biggest concern with this over is the 0:16:24.200 --> 0:16:26.760 risk of just getting games scripted out of it, because 0:16:26.800 --> 0:16:29.200 we've seen how easily teams have been able to run 0:16:29.240 --> 0:16:32.440 on the Broncos, and if the Chargers have been paying attention, 0:16:32.880 --> 0:16:35.360 they would maybe try to lean into that trend and 0:16:35.480 --> 0:16:38.880 just pound Melvin Gordon, pound Austin Eckler into the ground 0:16:38.880 --> 0:16:41.440 here and just slow the game down, you know, win 0:16:41.600 --> 0:16:45.560 small and not drive the score up. That would be 0:16:45.560 --> 0:16:47.560 my primary concern here. Do you have any worries about 0:16:47.560 --> 0:16:48.760 that sort of outcome? 0:16:49.080 --> 0:16:51.160 Sure, but I mean, look at what the Jaguars did 0:16:51.240 --> 0:16:53.440 last week with Leonard Fournette and that game, I think 0:16:53.600 --> 0:16:56.440 total fifty when it was end. I mean, I agree 0:16:56.440 --> 0:16:58.000 that I certainly think that they could do it. But 0:16:58.320 --> 0:17:01.800 I think the difference is I think I think that 0:17:01.680 --> 0:17:05.600 the Broncos are able to score, you know, and I 0:17:05.640 --> 0:17:07.960 think that they're desperate. Not that that really matters because 0:17:07.960 --> 0:17:09.920 they're not a great team. Although they easily could have 0:17:10.040 --> 0:17:12.360 three wins at this point, they they've let a few 0:17:12.359 --> 0:17:15.879 games get away. So even if the Chargers lean on 0:17:15.880 --> 0:17:18.280 the run here heavily and again I don't expect Melvin 0:17:18.320 --> 0:17:20.080 Gordon to just come out here and get twenty five 0:17:20.240 --> 0:17:22.639 carries or anything like that. I'm right, I mean, you know, 0:17:22.680 --> 0:17:24.520 in the end, that's what it is. And Eckler, you know, 0:17:24.600 --> 0:17:26.040 is great, but he's not a guy who you can 0:17:26.080 --> 0:17:27.919 pound into the ground right there. He's much more out 0:17:27.960 --> 0:17:30.200 of the passing game. I think that, you know, they'll 0:17:30.200 --> 0:17:33.120 take their shots enough, but what it really comes down 0:17:33.119 --> 0:17:35.119 to is, even if they lean on the run, I 0:17:35.160 --> 0:17:37.400 expect the Broncos to be able to put up points here. 0:17:37.440 --> 0:17:39.600 So I don't see this as a Chargers are up 0:17:40.200 --> 0:17:42.480 seventeen to nothing and they're just gonna run and slow 0:17:42.520 --> 0:17:44.600 the ball that I think that they the Broncos are 0:17:44.600 --> 0:17:46.119 going to be able to put up points here. So 0:17:46.160 --> 0:17:49.040 I'm okay forty four and a half. I admit completely. 0:17:49.240 --> 0:17:52.359 I have minor concerns here, especially because the Broncos, and 0:17:52.400 --> 0:17:54.080 I don't like, you know, the Broncos basically are going 0:17:54.160 --> 0:17:55.880 to have to put up twenty points to be able 0:17:55.920 --> 0:17:58.040 to make this work. But I think they can and 0:17:58.080 --> 0:18:01.160 I think, you know, again, they've also played some tough defenses. 0:18:01.160 --> 0:18:03.159 They've played the Packers, they played the Bear, so the 0:18:03.240 --> 0:18:05.919 fact that Joe Flacco is performing as he is and 0:18:05.960 --> 0:18:09.520 the offense is gelling as much as it is, I 0:18:09.560 --> 0:18:11.159 think is sort of a testament to the fact that 0:18:11.160 --> 0:18:14.000 they probably actually have a pretty decent offense, and I 0:18:14.000 --> 0:18:15.440 think they're going to be able to move the ball here. 0:18:15.720 --> 0:18:17.560 Yeah. The thing I like about this bet is that 0:18:17.600 --> 0:18:19.679 it kind of plays against public perception, which is a 0:18:19.680 --> 0:18:22.200 big part I think of sports betting is you kind 0:18:22.200 --> 0:18:24.160 of have to fade the public for the most part, 0:18:24.320 --> 0:18:26.760 and people are going to look at the Broncos versus 0:18:26.800 --> 0:18:29.119 the Chargers and they're going to think back to not 0:18:29.280 --> 0:18:31.080 just last week and the week before that, but even 0:18:31.160 --> 0:18:34.000 last season, and there's this residual effect of these teams 0:18:34.040 --> 0:18:35.920 are good defensive teams, and oh, I want to take 0:18:35.920 --> 0:18:38.520 the under on this over under. But I like the 0:18:38.560 --> 0:18:40.000 case that you've laid out, Like you look at the 0:18:40.040 --> 0:18:43.080 offense for Denver, they've been surprisingly good, they ranked twelfth 0:18:43.080 --> 0:18:45.959 and DVA, and the passing defense for the Chargers has 0:18:46.000 --> 0:18:49.160 been surprisingly bad, the thirtieth in DVA. So I see 0:18:49.440 --> 0:18:52.280 the blueprint for what you're going for. Like I said, 0:18:52.320 --> 0:18:54.560 my main concern is that considering how banged up the 0:18:54.640 --> 0:18:56.919 Chargers receivers are and the fact that they've just got 0:18:57.000 --> 0:18:59.080 Melvin Gordon back makes me think that they might just 0:18:59.119 --> 0:19:01.560 try to slow the game down, run fewer plays, and 0:19:02.160 --> 0:19:04.160 just just go with a run heavy approach. But yeah, 0:19:04.359 --> 0:19:06.399 if the Broncos can score, am. 0:19:06.240 --> 0:19:08.399 I not mat Yeah, And it's a good point you 0:19:08.440 --> 0:19:10.679 bring up when you're fading the public, because that's a 0:19:10.680 --> 0:19:14.040 winning strategy in the long term, and here it kind 0:19:14.040 --> 0:19:16.200 of plays right into that. I'm looking at the splits. 0:19:16.480 --> 0:19:19.880 It's roughly fifty to fifty slightly more on the under 0:19:19.880 --> 0:19:22.240 here on the number of bets, but the total money 0:19:22.240 --> 0:19:24.520 bet is about three to one in favor of the over. 0:19:24.720 --> 0:19:27.200 So I think that that shows you that most likely 0:19:27.240 --> 0:19:29.400 the sharper betters are going with the over, and they're 0:19:29.400 --> 0:19:31.600 going against the public, and that's usually a winning scenario. 0:19:31.680 --> 0:19:35.160 So for that reason, I feel pretty good there about 0:19:35.160 --> 0:19:36.840 going with over forty four and a half. Let's get 0:19:36.840 --> 0:19:38.280 to your third one here, what do you got for me? 0:19:38.720 --> 0:19:42.040 Okay, this team has burned me continuously through the season, 0:19:42.040 --> 0:19:44.359 but I'm taking the Cardinals plus three at Cincinnati. 0:19:44.480 --> 0:19:45.080 Wow. 0:19:45.280 --> 0:19:47.879 These teams rank thirtieth and thirty first in total dvaway 0:19:48.240 --> 0:19:50.920 and if you look at the Dave Numbers, the Dave 0:19:51.000 --> 0:19:53.679 Numbers at Football Outsiders, which wait their presets and projections, 0:19:53.880 --> 0:19:56.639 they rank twenty ninth and thirty first, and we're splitting 0:19:56.640 --> 0:19:58.320 hairs when it comes to teams that are that close. 0:19:58.359 --> 0:20:01.359 But in both cases, Arizona ranked higher than Cincinnati. So 0:20:01.400 --> 0:20:03.119 while we have to take a grit assault for the 0:20:03.160 --> 0:20:06.439 slim margins between these two teams, the Cardinals are a 0:20:06.520 --> 0:20:09.480 better team analytically. They also have a better point differential 0:20:09.520 --> 0:20:11.840 than the Bengals by about three points, So how come 0:20:11.880 --> 0:20:14.800 the Cards are three point underdogs. Ultimately, this matchup just 0:20:14.800 --> 0:20:17.280 appears to be a true test of that home field 0:20:17.280 --> 0:20:20.160 advantage being worth three point scenario right. But as close 0:20:20.160 --> 0:20:23.240 as this these two teams are in overall efficiency, there 0:20:23.240 --> 0:20:25.439 are certain angles where I feel like Arizona has a 0:20:25.440 --> 0:20:29.080 distinct advantage. Specifically with their rushing offense. The Cardinals ranked 0:20:29.080 --> 0:20:31.440 fifth and rushing offense DVA, while the Bengals ranked twenty 0:20:31.440 --> 0:20:34.199 second in rushing defense dvaway and as bad as the 0:20:34.240 --> 0:20:36.600 Arizona O line has been in pass protection, where they're 0:20:36.640 --> 0:20:39.159 twenty eighth in adjusted sacrate, they've been really solid in 0:20:39.160 --> 0:20:42.040 the running game with an adjusted lineyards mark ranking eleventh 0:20:42.119 --> 0:20:44.560 best in the NFL. And for comparison, you look at 0:20:44.600 --> 0:20:47.000 the other side of the line matchup there, the Bengals 0:20:47.040 --> 0:20:49.959 D line ranks twenty second in adjusted lineyards. So you 0:20:50.000 --> 0:20:51.960 add it all up, and the Cardinals should be able 0:20:51.960 --> 0:20:54.240 to run the ball. And that's probably the biggest concern 0:20:54.320 --> 0:20:56.959 I have with someone who might try to tuck themselves 0:20:56.960 --> 0:20:59.040 into the over on this game of forty seven points 0:20:59.040 --> 0:21:01.639 based upon the project pace of these two teams. Like like, 0:21:01.680 --> 0:21:03.359 don't get me wrong, I think the over is probably 0:21:03.400 --> 0:21:05.640 still a better bet than the under based on those 0:21:05.680 --> 0:21:09.440 projected pay stats, But I don't know. We haven't seen 0:21:09.480 --> 0:21:12.080 these teams play with a big lead yet, and so 0:21:12.240 --> 0:21:14.560 if Arizona gets up big or if Cincinnati gets up big, 0:21:14.840 --> 0:21:18.480 does that that pace that we're expecting come crashing down. 0:21:19.040 --> 0:21:21.320 But in general, Arizona is by far the fastest team. 0:21:21.400 --> 0:21:23.879 Cincinnati ranks tenth in seconds per play, And when the 0:21:23.920 --> 0:21:26.119 score differential is plus or minus six points, you know 0:21:26.160 --> 0:21:28.800 that is a one possession game. So I'm not going 0:21:28.880 --> 0:21:31.280 to pick the over with high confidence. There's just too 0:21:31.359 --> 0:21:33.479 much risk of a run heavy approach from Arizona kind 0:21:33.480 --> 0:21:35.560 of sucking the life out of the ball like we 0:21:35.680 --> 0:21:38.240 just talked about with the Chargers, especially now that the 0:21:38.240 --> 0:21:40.960 Bengals are missing John Brown to injury. So while I 0:21:41.000 --> 0:21:42.640 do like the over in this matchup, I'm much more 0:21:42.640 --> 0:21:45.080 inclined just to tap the underdog who probably shouldn't be 0:21:45.080 --> 0:21:46.880 an underdog. So I'm gonna take the points. I'm gonna 0:21:46.880 --> 0:21:49.280 take Arizona. I think that they should be able to 0:21:49.280 --> 0:21:50.640 cover this, if not win it out right. 0:21:50.840 --> 0:21:53.840 Yeah, the consensus is with the sixty three percent favorite 0:21:53.840 --> 0:21:57.080 Arizona and seventy three percent of the top twenty percent 0:21:57.200 --> 0:22:00.000 most accurate experts also favorite Arizona. I think we can 0:22:00.160 --> 0:22:03.200 put this one. I think, honestly, with all of your 0:22:03.200 --> 0:22:06.000 picks every they all fall into the same bucket for 0:22:06.080 --> 0:22:07.960 how I feel about them, which is when I make 0:22:08.000 --> 0:22:09.920 my picks on the site, I'm going to go with 0:22:10.000 --> 0:22:12.360 them because that is the way I lean. I don't 0:22:12.400 --> 0:22:15.639 feel quite as strong about it, just because I feel 0:22:15.640 --> 0:22:18.680 like I've been backing Arizona, you know, especially last week 0:22:18.680 --> 0:22:21.080 against the Seahawks and they look terrible. I actually think, 0:22:21.119 --> 0:22:23.120 you know, you brought up the injury to John Ross, 0:22:23.119 --> 0:22:26.280 and I think that actually is a big deal. If 0:22:26.440 --> 0:22:29.800 just because it strikes me as Zach Taylor's system kind 0:22:29.800 --> 0:22:32.439 of needs someone to really stretch the field there to 0:22:32.480 --> 0:22:35.080 open things up, right. I mean, even though Ross doesn't 0:22:35.119 --> 0:22:37.159 get that many targets and he's really just kind of 0:22:37.160 --> 0:22:38.840 a big play guy, or he had been so far, 0:22:39.000 --> 0:22:41.200 you know, you don't have aj Green yet. So without 0:22:41.280 --> 0:22:43.960 that field stretcher right there, I actually think that that's 0:22:44.000 --> 0:22:46.440 going to have a pretty big impact on the way 0:22:46.440 --> 0:22:48.960 the Bengals are able to run their offense. And again, 0:22:49.000 --> 0:22:53.000 they're coming off the short week. They looked absolutely terrible. 0:22:53.320 --> 0:22:57.520 Their offensive line is dreadful, and again it's too bad defensive. 0:22:57.560 --> 0:23:01.480 So I agree with you know, probably lean towards the overall. 0:23:01.520 --> 0:23:04.040 I know that's not your pick anyway, but I do 0:23:04.080 --> 0:23:08.159 think that Cincinnati might have a little more trouble. You know, 0:23:08.200 --> 0:23:10.560 I know they couldn't move the ball at all last 0:23:10.600 --> 0:23:13.000 week against the Steelers, but I think they might have 0:23:13.280 --> 0:23:16.879 sort of surprising trouble putting up points here against an 0:23:16.920 --> 0:23:19.920 admittedly bad defense. So I certainly lean towards Arizona with you. 0:23:19.960 --> 0:23:22.720 I'm not going crazy over it just because man, Arizona, 0:23:22.880 --> 0:23:26.560 it's they're just not a great football team, especially right 0:23:26.560 --> 0:23:30.000 now with Peterson still out, and you know their injuries 0:23:30.000 --> 0:23:32.560 to their cornerbacks and their offensive line as well. But 0:23:32.920 --> 0:23:34.640 if they lean on the run here a little more, 0:23:34.680 --> 0:23:36.480 which is what you think they're going to wind up doing, 0:23:36.920 --> 0:23:40.400 I certainly think that that leans towards Arizona getting three points. 0:23:40.640 --> 0:23:43.119 All right, let's move on here. My last one is 0:23:43.280 --> 0:23:45.720 I am taking another over under here, but I'm going 0:23:45.760 --> 0:23:47.720 back to my favorite, which is under, and I'm going 0:23:47.800 --> 0:23:49.919 to take the Cowboys and the Packers to come in 0:23:50.119 --> 0:23:53.480 under forty six and a half. Now, my reasoning here 0:23:53.600 --> 0:23:56.840 is not rocket science. Just take a giant step back. 0:23:57.280 --> 0:23:59.960 Think about the game from like an average football fans 0:24:00.080 --> 0:24:02.720 point of view. If you are the Packers defense, you 0:24:02.840 --> 0:24:04.800 probably want to do what you can to keep Dak 0:24:04.800 --> 0:24:07.440 Prescott on the sideline as much as possible. And if 0:24:07.440 --> 0:24:09.560 you're the Cowboys, you want to do the same with 0:24:09.640 --> 0:24:12.080 Aaron Rodgers. And if you're the Cowboys, you're in luck 0:24:12.200 --> 0:24:15.280 because even though the Packers have an outstanding pass defense, 0:24:15.560 --> 0:24:18.399 as I've mentioned three times already, they have a pretty 0:24:18.600 --> 0:24:21.080 leaky run defense. And that sounds like a whole lot 0:24:21.119 --> 0:24:24.840 of Ezekiel Elliott to me, with long, methodical drives. And 0:24:24.880 --> 0:24:26.600 you add to that the fact that Tyron Smith is 0:24:26.640 --> 0:24:28.680 going to miss this game, and I think the Cowboys 0:24:28.680 --> 0:24:31.240 are going to have major struggles moving the ball through 0:24:31.240 --> 0:24:33.240 the air, and the Packers are off a mini BI 0:24:33.640 --> 0:24:35.960 and Dallas is on a bit of a short week now. 0:24:36.480 --> 0:24:39.160 I ornarily I would say, okay, well, let the Packers 0:24:39.200 --> 0:24:40.479 are probably going to be able to move the ball 0:24:40.520 --> 0:24:42.520 pretty well put up some points. But again, you've got 0:24:42.560 --> 0:24:46.359 DeVante Adams almost certainly missing this game. Geronimo Allison, Marcus 0:24:46.440 --> 0:24:49.840 Valdez scantling, Jimmy Graham. You saw how frustrated Aaron Rodgers 0:24:49.960 --> 0:24:51.880 was without Adams there at the end of the game. 0:24:51.920 --> 0:24:54.720 You still have Aaron Jones, of course, but Dallas overall 0:24:54.880 --> 0:24:58.240 has a pretty solid defense, and the Packers, for whatever reason, 0:24:58.400 --> 0:25:00.440 they just stop playing in the side and a half. 0:25:00.480 --> 0:25:02.200 I mean, I don't know how many points I want 0:25:02.240 --> 0:25:04.080 to say, it's like ten points or fewer that they 0:25:04.160 --> 0:25:06.320 put up in the second half all season long. So 0:25:06.480 --> 0:25:09.560 this game strikes me as a close game, relatively low scoring. 0:25:09.800 --> 0:25:12.200 The total has come down since that look aheadline. I 0:25:12.200 --> 0:25:14.280 think it might have been forty seven and a half 0:25:14.320 --> 0:25:16.040 at some point, but for now, I will take the 0:25:16.160 --> 0:25:18.760 under on forty six and a half. And this one 0:25:18.760 --> 0:25:20.560 strikes me as something where it's going to be much 0:25:20.600 --> 0:25:23.760 closer to, like, you know, mid between thirty five and 0:25:23.800 --> 0:25:25.800 forty as both teams try to kind of control the 0:25:25.840 --> 0:25:26.280 ball well. 0:25:26.320 --> 0:25:28.560 And this is another classic case where you're fading the public. 0:25:28.640 --> 0:25:30.880 The Green Bay Packers and the Dallas Cowboys are two 0:25:30.920 --> 0:25:33.320 of the most traditional public teams. They have some of 0:25:33.359 --> 0:25:35.560 the biggest fan bases out there. People love to bet 0:25:35.640 --> 0:25:37.720 on them, and people love to bet the over. People 0:25:37.760 --> 0:25:40.840 love to root for more points, not fewer points. And 0:25:40.880 --> 0:25:43.159 with that in mind, it does not surprise me that 0:25:43.200 --> 0:25:45.399 the books are inflating maybe the over under by a 0:25:45.440 --> 0:25:47.639 point or two to account for that. And so I 0:25:47.720 --> 0:25:50.399 love this call. I think in general, Aaron Rodgers is 0:25:50.880 --> 0:25:52.960 a little bit more washed than some people might want 0:25:52.960 --> 0:25:54.680 to admit. I'm not saying he's bad. I'm just saying 0:25:54.720 --> 0:25:56.960 he's not the quarterback he once used to be. And 0:25:57.040 --> 0:25:59.240 you see that reflected in their offensive numbers. They rank 0:25:59.320 --> 0:26:02.439 sixteenth and dvs. Thirteenth and passing offense DV away. He 0:26:02.520 --> 0:26:05.120 is not an elite passer anymore. And if they're missing 0:26:05.160 --> 0:26:07.480 Demante Adams, like you said, this could be kind of 0:26:07.520 --> 0:26:10.640 a rude awakening for them against a pretty solid Cowboys defense. 0:26:10.880 --> 0:26:13.360 And above all that point you made about Ezekiel Elliott 0:26:13.400 --> 0:26:16.919 going crazy against this Green Bay running defense, that's a 0:26:16.920 --> 0:26:20.159 great one. The Packers rank twenty seventh in rushing defense 0:26:20.200 --> 0:26:24.480 DVA thirty first in adjusted lineyards along the defensive line. 0:26:24.520 --> 0:26:26.960 So yeah, I totally agree this is a great call. 0:26:27.000 --> 0:26:28.359 It might be the best bet that we've thrown out 0:26:28.400 --> 0:26:31.120 here all game or all day because it is one 0:26:31.119 --> 0:26:34.120 that really kind of clashes against that public team perception. 0:26:34.520 --> 0:26:37.320 Yeah, and again it is going against the way the 0:26:37.359 --> 0:26:39.760 game is being bet. It's about fifty to fifty split 0:26:39.840 --> 0:26:42.359 on the over under here in the number of bets, 0:26:42.359 --> 0:26:45.760 but the money coming in is about sixty five percent 0:26:45.880 --> 0:26:48.399 in favor of the under. So that's another game where 0:26:48.520 --> 0:26:50.560 you know the sharper betters are probably hitting the under. 0:26:50.600 --> 0:26:52.320 And again you called it right. I mean, this is 0:26:52.320 --> 0:26:54.760 a game and when book bankers set the lines, they 0:26:54.760 --> 0:26:56.320 think about which way the public is going to go, 0:26:56.320 --> 0:26:58.400 of course, because they want the money to basically even 0:26:58.440 --> 0:27:00.280 out on both sides. So it is something where I 0:27:00.280 --> 0:27:02.480 think this line is set intentionally. It has come down, 0:27:02.520 --> 0:27:04.240 as I've said, but not enough for me to be 0:27:04.280 --> 0:27:04.719 scared off. 0:27:04.720 --> 0:27:04.800 It. 0:27:04.920 --> 0:27:06.920 I feel pretty comfortable at it, even at forty six 0:27:06.920 --> 0:27:09.520 and a half. All right, let us recap. You have 0:27:10.359 --> 0:27:15.160 the Ravens over the Steelers giving three, the Titans laying 0:27:15.240 --> 0:27:19.480 three to the Bills, and the Cardinals getting three from 0:27:19.520 --> 0:27:21.960 the Bengals. I got that right, correct, All right, good, 0:27:22.000 --> 0:27:24.399 I've got the Vikings laying five to the Giants, the 0:27:24.480 --> 0:27:26.480 Charters and the Broncos to go over forty four and 0:27:26.520 --> 0:27:28.760 a half, and the Cowboys and the Packers to come 0:27:28.760 --> 0:27:31.280 in under forty six and a half. Now, before we 0:27:31.320 --> 0:27:33.240 move on, I want to tell everyone about the sponsor 0:27:33.280 --> 0:27:36.879 of today's show, bet MGM. Now you know about betmgm already, 0:27:36.880 --> 0:27:40.080 and in particular the betmgm Sports app, because it's the 0:27:40.160 --> 0:27:42.399 easiest and best way to place a bet if you 0:27:42.440 --> 0:27:44.280 were in the state of New Jersey. Just search for 0:27:44.400 --> 0:27:47.680 and download the Betmgmsports app on your phone or visit 0:27:47.680 --> 0:27:50.359 betmgm dot com. Sign up for an account, and you 0:27:50.359 --> 0:27:52.640 can place a bet right from your home. And once 0:27:52.640 --> 0:27:54.480 you sign up for an account, you'll want to pay 0:27:54.520 --> 0:27:58.400 attention because betmgm offers boosted bets and promotions across all 0:27:58.400 --> 0:28:00.800 major sports. I mentioned this last week, but there was 0:28:00.880 --> 0:28:03.439 a Daniel Jones boosted bet in his first game against 0:28:03.440 --> 0:28:05.240 the Bucks, where the odds on him to throw even 0:28:05.280 --> 0:28:08.440 a single touchdown pass were dropped significantly, such that you 0:28:08.480 --> 0:28:10.760 could make even money if you place the bet, where 0:28:10.800 --> 0:28:14.040 ordinarily you'd be laying about minus three seventy five. They 0:28:14.040 --> 0:28:15.960 also let you track your bets in real time, and 0:28:16.000 --> 0:28:18.280 they offer early cash outs where you can settle a 0:28:18.320 --> 0:28:20.400 bet before the game even ends to lock in your 0:28:20.440 --> 0:28:22.800 winnings or cut your losses. And if you sign up 0:28:22.880 --> 0:28:25.440 right now, you can get a free five hundred dollars bet. 0:28:25.600 --> 0:28:28.440 Here's the deal. When you download the BETMGM Sports app 0:28:28.560 --> 0:28:31.080 and you sign up using our promo code Harris. That's 0:28:31.119 --> 0:28:33.600 my last name, Harris, then your first bet of up 0:28:33.640 --> 0:28:36.720 to five hundred dollars is risk free. If you lose, 0:28:37.000 --> 0:28:40.040 bet MGM credits you the amount you lost up to 0:28:40.200 --> 0:28:43.680 five hundred dollars for future wagers. Just download the app 0:28:43.720 --> 0:28:46.200 and use the promo code Harris to claim their promotion, 0:28:46.480 --> 0:28:49.640 and you can go to betmgm dot com for further details. 0:28:49.840 --> 0:28:51.720 You must be twenty one years or older, and although 0:28:51.760 --> 0:28:54.160 you can sign up an easily deposit money anywhere, you 0:28:54.240 --> 0:28:56.120 must be in the state of New Jersey. To place 0:28:56.160 --> 0:28:58.720 a sports bet, visit BETMGM dot com for the full 0:28:58.760 --> 0:29:00.960 list of terms and condition and if you've got a 0:29:01.000 --> 0:29:04.200 gambling problem, called one eight hundred gambler. All right, Greg, 0:29:04.280 --> 0:29:06.240 let's move on to it's a trap where we list 0:29:06.280 --> 0:29:08.040 the line that we are avoiding start us off. 0:29:08.320 --> 0:29:10.000 Yeah, so there are a couple of directions. I wasn't. 0:29:10.160 --> 0:29:12.040 There are a lot of lines I'm avoiding basically every week. 0:29:12.080 --> 0:29:14.000 I think that's a key takeaway here. But I'm going 0:29:14.040 --> 0:29:16.400 to go with Cleveland at San Francisco minus three and 0:29:16.440 --> 0:29:18.520 a half. I just don't think we know who these 0:29:18.560 --> 0:29:21.800 teams really are yet. We've seen the Browns show some 0:29:21.960 --> 0:29:24.200 science that they're getting on track, and while I did 0:29:24.280 --> 0:29:25.960 expect the forty nine ers to make a bit of 0:29:26.000 --> 0:29:28.360 a leap this season, the way they've done it, mostly 0:29:28.400 --> 0:29:30.280 with defense, has caught me off guard. So I don't 0:29:30.280 --> 0:29:32.160 have a good feel for either of these teams just yet. 0:29:32.160 --> 0:29:33.680 I think it's going to take me a couple more weeks. 0:29:33.920 --> 0:29:36.160 But more than anything else, I just hate the number. 0:29:36.320 --> 0:29:38.240 If it was a flat minus three, I'd feel much 0:29:38.240 --> 0:29:40.440 safer laying the wood with San Francisco, especially as they 0:29:40.440 --> 0:29:43.200 come off their by but that extra half point, while 0:29:43.200 --> 0:29:45.120 it might not seem like much, is enough to scare 0:29:45.120 --> 0:29:46.520 me off. I just have no idea what to do 0:29:46.560 --> 0:29:49.240 with this game. What do you think about Browns at niners? 0:29:49.520 --> 0:29:50.240 One hundred percent? 0:29:50.480 --> 0:29:50.760 There's it. 0:29:50.840 --> 0:29:52.680 First of all, that you bring up a good point, 0:29:52.720 --> 0:29:55.280 which is there's a huge difference between three and three 0:29:55.320 --> 0:29:58.160 and a half. I mean, that's that's a very big difference. 0:29:58.360 --> 0:30:01.120 It's off the key number for me, no idea, And 0:30:01.160 --> 0:30:03.320 that's the thing. I mean last week I felt pretty 0:30:03.480 --> 0:30:06.680 comfortable with the Ravens laying a pretty big number to 0:30:06.720 --> 0:30:09.160 the Browns because everything I had seen from the Browns 0:30:09.560 --> 0:30:13.000 made me essentially think that they're in complete disarray. Well, 0:30:13.000 --> 0:30:14.760 they looked great last week, and I realized there was 0:30:14.760 --> 0:30:17.400 an unexpected injury on the defensive side of the ball 0:30:17.560 --> 0:30:20.640 for Baltimore, but they looked so much better than I 0:30:20.680 --> 0:30:23.400 could remember them looking. And there's no reason for them 0:30:23.400 --> 0:30:26.880 to be playing just so disjointed as they had been 0:30:26.920 --> 0:30:28.640 all season long. So I can see them coming back 0:30:28.680 --> 0:30:32.080 on the other side the forty nine ers. It's this 0:30:32.200 --> 0:30:34.880 is just very unexpected at this point, and I haven't 0:30:34.920 --> 0:30:37.160 really gotten a good sense of that. And again to 0:30:37.240 --> 0:30:39.600 your exact point. And you know, I don't think there 0:30:39.600 --> 0:30:41.600 could be any greater endorsement of the fact that you 0:30:41.640 --> 0:30:43.840 want to avoid this bet is that when you look 0:30:43.880 --> 0:30:46.920 at the consensus breakdown, it's fifty three percent to forty 0:30:46.960 --> 0:30:49.080 seven percent, so it's split roughly down the middle. And 0:30:49.120 --> 0:30:51.400 if you look at the top twenty percent of most 0:30:51.400 --> 0:30:54.400 accurate experts, it's exactly fifty to fifty. I think that 0:30:54.600 --> 0:30:57.320 it basically says it all. It's because there is no 0:30:57.440 --> 0:31:00.400 smart lean on this one whatsoever. I have absolutely no 0:31:00.480 --> 0:31:04.040 feel for it. I'll be honest. I ask our guests 0:31:04.240 --> 0:31:06.440 to send me their picks in advance, just so I 0:31:06.480 --> 0:31:09.400 can make sure that I don't accidentally jump on them beforehand. 0:31:09.600 --> 0:31:11.959 This was definitely going to be my bet to avoid. 0:31:12.160 --> 0:31:13.680 I told Greg, you could do whatever you want, it 0:31:13.680 --> 0:31:15.680 would be fine. This one hundred percent would have been 0:31:15.680 --> 0:31:17.880 my bet to avoid because I have zero feel for it. 0:31:17.920 --> 0:31:20.680 So I hate you for stealing it, but I do 0:31:20.720 --> 0:31:22.600 think that it's a great pick, so I agree one 0:31:22.680 --> 0:31:24.760 hundred percent. For me, I'm going to go with my 0:31:24.880 --> 0:31:27.600 second bet to avoid. And again you pointed it correctly. 0:31:27.760 --> 0:31:29.120 There are a lot of bets that we could be 0:31:29.120 --> 0:31:31.440 talking about each and every week, and especially this week, 0:31:31.720 --> 0:31:35.000 I'm avoiding the Texans laying five to the Falcons. First 0:31:35.000 --> 0:31:37.440 of all, that's basically what I kind of expected to 0:31:37.440 --> 0:31:39.920 see from the point spread. But I think both these 0:31:39.920 --> 0:31:42.480 teams are a little desperate for a win here, and 0:31:42.520 --> 0:31:44.720 I kind of expect this to be a shootout. The 0:31:44.720 --> 0:31:47.200 Falcons defense is pretty banged up. We know they lost 0:31:47.280 --> 0:31:49.800 Kean O'Neil. Deshaun Watson has been playing poorly. There is 0:31:49.840 --> 0:31:51.560 going to be a lot of DeAndre Hopkins in this 0:31:51.600 --> 0:31:53.600 game and a lot of points from Houston. But I 0:31:53.680 --> 0:31:56.000 also think there's going to be a ton of points 0:31:56.200 --> 0:31:57.920 from the Falcons here. And I realized they have not 0:31:58.000 --> 0:32:00.600 played well. They have issues with their offensive line, but 0:32:00.680 --> 0:32:02.840 I think they know they have to get Julio Jones 0:32:02.840 --> 0:32:05.360 and Calvin Ridley more involved than last week. I think 0:32:05.360 --> 0:32:08.600 they can easily have success against the Houston secondary. And 0:32:08.640 --> 0:32:11.160 even if Houston wins like I expect, and even if 0:32:11.160 --> 0:32:13.040 they can jump out to a laite, I can completely 0:32:13.040 --> 0:32:15.040 see this last second cover for the Falcons. 0:32:15.080 --> 0:32:15.280 YEP. 0:32:15.440 --> 0:32:17.400 In this type of game, it's just two teams that 0:32:17.480 --> 0:32:19.760 have really underperformed. In my mind, it's hard to know 0:32:19.800 --> 0:32:21.440 what to expect from them, and I think both teams 0:32:21.480 --> 0:32:23.080 are going to try to use this as a get 0:32:23.120 --> 0:32:24.880 right game. So when I looked at this and I 0:32:24.920 --> 0:32:26.480 could not get a feel for it, So I'm completely 0:32:26.520 --> 0:32:27.200 staying away from this. 0:32:27.440 --> 0:32:28.920 Yeah, this is one of the games that I wrote 0:32:29.000 --> 0:32:31.480 up in my rankings article at two qbs dot com 0:32:31.480 --> 0:32:34.600 this week, and the specific conceit was that this game 0:32:34.640 --> 0:32:36.880 could go either way. Like you said, we don't really know, 0:32:37.480 --> 0:32:40.400 you know, are the Falcons truly as bad as they've 0:32:40.440 --> 0:32:42.240 looked so far? I mean, it seems like they are. 0:32:42.280 --> 0:32:44.360 But I think we have to be aware of recency 0:32:44.400 --> 0:32:47.000 bias because the Titans last week. They have a way 0:32:47.000 --> 0:32:49.520 of making other teams look bad, like we talked about earlier, 0:32:50.040 --> 0:32:52.320 and Houston's pass defense is such a mess, Like they 0:32:52.320 --> 0:32:54.760 have so many injuries in that secondary that even if 0:32:54.760 --> 0:32:58.440 Houston is cruising that backdoor cover from Matt Ryan, Julio Jones, 0:32:58.480 --> 0:33:01.840 Calvin Ridley in company, like that's definitely in play. I expected, 0:33:01.880 --> 0:33:05.640 you know, Houston minus three, Houston minus four, So Houston 0:33:05.640 --> 0:33:07.800 minus five or five and a half that that really 0:33:07.880 --> 0:33:09.840 is scary to me. If anything, I would take Atlanta here, 0:33:09.880 --> 0:33:12.160 But I agree in general, it's probably just to stay away. 0:33:12.360 --> 0:33:14.640 The five is kind of what I thought it would be. 0:33:14.720 --> 0:33:17.360 As I said, it's a big number, but again this 0:33:17.520 --> 0:33:20.200 is right. You completely see the back door cover that 0:33:20.200 --> 0:33:21.480 that's exactly what this would be. 0:33:21.520 --> 0:33:21.960 It would be be. 0:33:22.120 --> 0:33:23.680 Yeah, I feel pretty good. I think it's going to 0:33:23.720 --> 0:33:25.360 go and then but the risk of the back door 0:33:25.400 --> 0:33:27.880 cover is just screaming at you from this. So for me, 0:33:28.240 --> 0:33:30.120 I'm totally going to stay away. So you've got your 0:33:30.120 --> 0:33:32.720 avoiding the Browns at the forty nine ers with the 0:33:32.720 --> 0:33:34.560 forty nine ers laying three and a half, and I 0:33:34.560 --> 0:33:38.320 am avoiding the Falcons at the Texans where the Texans 0:33:38.360 --> 0:33:41.040 are laying five. All right, go. 0:33:41.040 --> 0:33:43.520 Ahead, can I I hate to interrupt the show and 0:33:43.840 --> 0:33:45.719 steer this in another direction, but can I throw one 0:33:45.720 --> 0:33:47.160 more game at you just to get your temperature on, 0:33:47.200 --> 0:33:48.760 because this is another one I've been struggling with one 0:33:48.840 --> 0:33:51.680 hundred percent Tampa Bay at New Orleans. The line opened 0:33:51.760 --> 0:33:53.280 is high, I think is five and a half points. 0:33:53.320 --> 0:33:54.800 It's now it's all the way down to three points 0:33:54.840 --> 0:33:57.240 with New Orleans is the favorite. So all the value 0:33:57.240 --> 0:33:59.120 that might have been on Tampa Bay has been bet away. 0:33:59.480 --> 0:34:01.440 And this is another one where another matchup where I 0:34:01.440 --> 0:34:03.160 feel like it's hard to pin down exactly how good 0:34:03.200 --> 0:34:05.480 these teams are. What do you think about this one, 0:34:05.480 --> 0:34:07.080 because this is one that I really struggled with. 0:34:07.520 --> 0:34:09.520 If it's at three right now, is that we're saying 0:34:09.560 --> 0:34:11.200 that because this is all the way down that low? 0:34:11.600 --> 0:34:12.520 Yes, let me see it. 0:34:12.600 --> 0:34:14.960 Oh my goodness, all right. I hadn't looked at it 0:34:15.040 --> 0:34:17.399 yet today because last I saw it was at three 0:34:17.400 --> 0:34:18.640 and a half. And again I saw it earlier in 0:34:18.640 --> 0:34:20.839 the week when it was high. No, not at three, 0:34:21.000 --> 0:34:23.879 not not anywhere close to to three. I really liked 0:34:23.880 --> 0:34:25.839 it when it was closer to five. And I liked 0:34:25.840 --> 0:34:27.480 it for the Bucks because I. 0:34:28.680 --> 0:34:30.239 You and everyone else apparently right I got. 0:34:30.239 --> 0:34:32.320 I mean I guarant they got hammered. That the books 0:34:32.400 --> 0:34:34.319 must have gotten completely hammered. I mean, in the end, 0:34:34.680 --> 0:34:39.000 the Saints look they kudos to the coaching staff and 0:34:39.040 --> 0:34:41.879 Sean Payton. They're winning games relying on their defense. Teddy 0:34:41.880 --> 0:34:45.279 Bridgewater looks terrible. I mean, he really just does not 0:34:45.360 --> 0:34:48.560 look good. And although you can attack the Bucks through 0:34:48.600 --> 0:34:51.759 the air, I don't really have faith that Bridgewater is 0:34:51.800 --> 0:34:53.840 going to do it. So I don't expect the Saints 0:34:54.000 --> 0:34:56.560 to be putting up a ton of points here in 0:34:56.600 --> 0:34:59.479 this game, and the bucks, you know, they're a little 0:34:59.520 --> 0:35:02.640 jekyl and I get, but you know you can see 0:35:02.680 --> 0:35:05.040 what that offense can do even against the strong defense. 0:35:05.080 --> 0:35:07.120 So if you were giving me five points, I was 0:35:07.160 --> 0:35:10.160 all over it. At three, I don't like it. If anything, 0:35:10.200 --> 0:35:12.520 I think i'd risk it and take the bucks on 0:35:12.520 --> 0:35:14.319 the money line and go for it that way, because 0:35:14.320 --> 0:35:16.479 I could see them winning out right. But I don't 0:35:16.480 --> 0:35:18.880 think I have any interest in it going three. I actually, honestly, 0:35:18.920 --> 0:35:21.200 I did not even realize that it had gone down 0:35:21.600 --> 0:35:24.000 that low. So certainly that low three and a half, 0:35:24.120 --> 0:35:27.240 I'm a little intrigued where it was, but still probably 0:35:27.280 --> 0:35:28.960 staying away when it was more a four, four and 0:35:29.000 --> 0:35:31.200 a half, even five at some places, I was all 0:35:31.239 --> 0:35:32.960 over it, all right, real quick, Before we get to 0:35:33.000 --> 0:35:35.040 our next segment, I do want to remind everyone about 0:35:35.040 --> 0:35:37.920 our contest where we're giving away a signed Alvin Kamara 0:35:38.000 --> 0:35:41.120 helmet courtesy of our good friends over at Pristine Auction. 0:35:41.280 --> 0:35:43.400 You've got a couple more weeks here to enter, so 0:35:43.440 --> 0:35:45.360 go ahead and do so. Just leave a review for 0:35:45.400 --> 0:35:48.719 the show on iTunes or Stitcher and send a screenshot 0:35:48.760 --> 0:35:51.799 of that review to contest at bettingpros dot com, and 0:35:51.840 --> 0:35:53.920 if you entered last month's contest you are already in, 0:35:54.160 --> 0:35:57.120 so no worries there. All right, Greg, it is time 0:35:57.360 --> 0:36:00.359 for Top Prop, where we list our top player proper 0:36:00.360 --> 0:36:03.400 for the weekend. Now, you mentioned Marquise Brown. Is that right? 0:36:03.440 --> 0:36:04.880 That that was one of the ones you like but 0:36:04.920 --> 0:36:05.759 not your top prop? 0:36:05.840 --> 0:36:07.600 Is that right? Yeah? I considered that one, and that 0:36:07.640 --> 0:36:09.440 one might be safer than the one I'm gonna go with, 0:36:09.520 --> 0:36:11.640 but yeah, I've got a different one, all right, go 0:36:11.719 --> 0:36:14.480 for it. So my top prop is Kyler Murray to 0:36:14.560 --> 0:36:17.440 go over three hundred passing yards at plus three point fifty. 0:36:17.719 --> 0:36:20.920 This pick ties directly into my earlier pick of Arizona, 0:36:21.080 --> 0:36:23.959 and you know that lean towards the over the pace 0:36:24.000 --> 0:36:26.319 of this game should be very up tempo. According to 0:36:26.320 --> 0:36:29.359 Football Outsiders, the Cardinals rank first in situation neutral pace, 0:36:29.600 --> 0:36:32.879 the Bengals ranked twelfth, and overall, the Cards rank first 0:36:32.880 --> 0:36:35.440 and seconds per play while the Bengals ranked seventh, So 0:36:35.480 --> 0:36:39.160 that's in all situations. Murray himself his eclipsed three hundred 0:36:39.200 --> 0:36:43.480 passing yards twice this season, already against Baltimore and against Detroit, 0:36:43.520 --> 0:36:46.480 although that did have some help from overtime. Against the Panthers, 0:36:46.480 --> 0:36:48.040 he only got to one hundred and seventy one yards, 0:36:48.080 --> 0:36:50.200 but Carolina's defense is one of the best in the league. 0:36:50.320 --> 0:36:52.399 And against the Seahawks, Kyler made it to two hundred 0:36:52.400 --> 0:36:54.440 and forty one yards, but Seattle plays with one of 0:36:54.480 --> 0:36:56.200 the slowest paces in the league, so it kind of 0:36:56.200 --> 0:36:58.960 makes sense that the Cardinals got slowed down in that 0:36:59.000 --> 0:37:01.279 he wasn't able to throw quite as much. Now, Kyler 0:37:01.320 --> 0:37:03.160 Murray gets to face an up tempo team with a 0:37:03.200 --> 0:37:05.360 bad defense like the Bengals are really bad, and the 0:37:05.400 --> 0:37:07.920 Cardinals play with that for anatic pace themselves, So I 0:37:07.920 --> 0:37:09.720 think it makes sense to project a lot of yards 0:37:09.760 --> 0:37:11.960 a lot of scoring in this game. As I alluded 0:37:12.000 --> 0:37:15.160 to earlier when discussing the game, you know the line 0:37:15.200 --> 0:37:17.080 and the total. There is some risk of a run 0:37:17.120 --> 0:37:20.960 heavy approach with Arizona with David Johnson and Chase Edmonds, 0:37:21.160 --> 0:37:22.719 And on top of that, we do have yet to 0:37:22.719 --> 0:37:24.719 see either of these teams play with a lead off 0:37:24.760 --> 0:37:27.200 greater than seven points, so we don't really have any 0:37:27.280 --> 0:37:29.359 munication of what their paces might be if they can 0:37:29.520 --> 0:37:32.279 establish some sort of points cushion. So I guess if 0:37:32.280 --> 0:37:34.360 you want to play it more conservative, you can scale 0:37:34.400 --> 0:37:36.880 back the upside and get Kyler Murray to hit two 0:37:36.920 --> 0:37:38.959 hundred and fifty passing yards at plus one oh six. 0:37:39.200 --> 0:37:40.839 So that's kind of a backup if you're not quite 0:37:40.840 --> 0:37:42.800 as greedy as I am. But I'd rather take the 0:37:42.800 --> 0:37:45.600 shot at the bigger payout with three three hundred or 0:37:45.600 --> 0:37:47.280 more passing yards at plus three fifty. 0:37:47.440 --> 0:37:49.200 Yeah, I love the odds there, I mean plus three 0:37:49.280 --> 0:37:50.719 fifty because they are going to be able to move 0:37:50.760 --> 0:37:53.080 the ball pretty much at will. I mean, you see, 0:37:53.200 --> 0:37:56.120 you know, Christian Kirk being out might affect it a 0:37:56.160 --> 0:37:58.400 little bit because I think he's already been rolled out 0:37:58.440 --> 0:38:01.480 for the game. But the Bengals are They're so terrible 0:38:01.520 --> 0:38:04.279 at tackling. I wrote off the game against the forty 0:38:04.360 --> 0:38:06.960 nine ers where they could not tackle anyone, because they 0:38:07.000 --> 0:38:11.160 looked halfway decent against the Seahawks in Week one, but man, 0:38:11.239 --> 0:38:14.240 they are just I mean, you can take a short, 0:38:14.320 --> 0:38:16.720 you know, screen pass, or you can take a slant 0:38:16.719 --> 0:38:17.959 and you can just take it to the house because 0:38:17.960 --> 0:38:19.880 I can't tackle anybody. I was going to ask you, 0:38:19.920 --> 0:38:21.279 but you brought it up and you got ahead of it. 0:38:21.320 --> 0:38:23.480 Is that you did say that you expected this to 0:38:23.520 --> 0:38:26.120 be probably focused a little bit more on the run 0:38:26.200 --> 0:38:29.560 ideally for the Cardinals. But at plus three fifty, I mean, 0:38:29.760 --> 0:38:32.600 those are great odds in the game where Murray, who 0:38:32.680 --> 0:38:35.440 has put up you know, big passing numbers already at 0:38:35.440 --> 0:38:37.560 some point this season, can get there again. So I 0:38:37.600 --> 0:38:39.920 do like to pick, particularly with the odds, and I 0:38:40.000 --> 0:38:41.680 like going a little boulder, you know, and then the 0:38:41.719 --> 0:38:44.520 two fifty because you know, plus three fifty that's a 0:38:44.600 --> 0:38:46.239 nice little pay day if you can hit it well. 0:38:46.239 --> 0:38:48.840 And as much as we might look at the matchup 0:38:48.880 --> 0:38:50.600 and say, oh, they should be running the ball more, 0:38:50.640 --> 0:38:54.239 we know that that's not the Arizona philosophy, right. Kingsbury 0:38:54.360 --> 0:38:56.080 wants to be chucking it all the time. He wants 0:38:56.080 --> 0:38:59.120 to run four wide, five wide, and when he gets 0:38:59.160 --> 0:39:01.680 to face is a team as bad as the Bengals, 0:39:02.040 --> 0:39:04.680 he actually will have the opportunity to do that without 0:39:05.000 --> 0:39:07.480 you know, even if he does like forgo that good 0:39:07.560 --> 0:39:10.560 rushing matchup, so he can still rush at times and 0:39:10.680 --> 0:39:12.840 exploit that. But I think if anything, he might just 0:39:12.840 --> 0:39:14.560 do that to set up more passing, because we know 0:39:14.600 --> 0:39:15.839 that's what he really wants to be doing. 0:39:16.040 --> 0:39:18.799 Yes, absolutely, he makes no secrets about it, so I 0:39:18.960 --> 0:39:21.560 like it, especially with the gian ods that you're getting. 0:39:21.560 --> 0:39:23.560 I'm going to go a little more conservative, but it 0:39:23.600 --> 0:39:26.719 does tie into one of my other picks, or rather 0:39:27.239 --> 0:39:29.920 non pick, and I am taking DeAndre Hopkins to go 0:39:30.000 --> 0:39:33.400 over eighty six and a half yards at minus one fourteen. 0:39:33.560 --> 0:39:36.560 If DeAndre Hopkins does not go over eighty six and 0:39:36.600 --> 0:39:39.080 a half yards, I am going to do one of 0:39:39.160 --> 0:39:42.160 next week shows with a British accent the entire way. Okay, 0:39:42.200 --> 0:39:44.759 he has surpassed that number in just one of four 0:39:44.800 --> 0:39:47.319 games this year, but it's about to be two. I 0:39:47.360 --> 0:39:50.760 don't know which one of Desmond Trufont or Isaiah Oliver 0:39:51.120 --> 0:39:52.680 is going to be on Hopkins for most of the day, 0:39:52.840 --> 0:39:55.040 but it's not going to matter. As I said, I 0:39:55.040 --> 0:39:56.799 think the Texans are going to put up a ton 0:39:57.120 --> 0:39:59.239 of points here. I think Hopkins is going to have 0:39:59.239 --> 0:40:01.760 a big role in it. And at minus one fourteen, 0:40:01.800 --> 0:40:04.160 I mean, that's really not that much deuce to have 0:40:04.200 --> 0:40:07.000 to lay. So I feel pretty confident. I realize I 0:40:07.040 --> 0:40:09.000 know one out of the four games, but this is 0:40:09.040 --> 0:40:11.359 a game both him and Julio Jones I think are 0:40:11.360 --> 0:40:14.600 gonna have huge games. I expect both teams to put 0:40:14.680 --> 0:40:16.560 up a ton of points here so if he doesn't 0:40:16.600 --> 0:40:18.759 go over eighty. So this is the prop. I'm gonna 0:40:18.760 --> 0:40:20.880 be honest, This is the prop since we started this 0:40:21.080 --> 0:40:23.719 that I feel most confident in. So I'm calling it 0:40:23.800 --> 0:40:25.920 British accent. If it doesn't hit, I'm ready to do 0:40:25.920 --> 0:40:27.160 it on one of the next two shows. 0:40:27.200 --> 0:40:29.319 Are you with me? I love it. I think this 0:40:29.400 --> 0:40:31.320 is going to be one of those shootout type matchups, 0:40:31.360 --> 0:40:34.560 and especially considering that Atlanta's secondary Hopkins should be able 0:40:34.560 --> 0:40:36.080 to get his They're going to try to get him going. 0:40:36.560 --> 0:40:40.560 The main concern I might have is that if Atlanta, 0:40:40.920 --> 0:40:43.280 knowing that they have such a bad pass defense, focuses 0:40:43.320 --> 0:40:45.920 a ton of attention on Hopkins, maybe Will Fuller and 0:40:46.000 --> 0:40:48.320 Kiki qt are the two who do most of the damage. 0:40:48.360 --> 0:40:50.920 But we've seen teams try to, you know, rein in 0:40:51.000 --> 0:40:52.920 Hopkins in the past. It's just not that easy to do, 0:40:52.960 --> 0:40:55.839 even with you know, occasional double coverage. So I like it. 0:40:55.880 --> 0:40:58.600 I think I might have even gone bolder, like looked 0:40:58.640 --> 0:41:00.360 at the props for one hundred yards or what, but 0:41:00.400 --> 0:41:02.759 maybe the payoffs just wasn't quite there. I'm not sure 0:41:02.760 --> 0:41:04.640 exactly what you were looking at. But I like it. 0:41:04.640 --> 0:41:06.000 Eighty six yards seems like a gimme. 0:41:06.360 --> 0:41:09.840 Yeah, I completely agree that. You know, especially Kenny Stills 0:41:09.920 --> 0:41:11.359 is probably gonna be out for this game, so that's 0:41:11.400 --> 0:41:14.239 one fear weapon you could have the defenses focusing in 0:41:14.280 --> 0:41:16.640 on Hopkins. I expect Will Fuller to have the game too. 0:41:16.680 --> 0:41:19.719 But the thing is just not with Trufont and Oliver Like, 0:41:19.920 --> 0:41:21.480 it's not gonna matter to me. You can give them 0:41:21.520 --> 0:41:24.000 safety help. I don't think it's gonna matter with Hopkins 0:41:24.040 --> 0:41:26.080 in this game. I think this is a game. You know, 0:41:26.320 --> 0:41:29.919 it's not quite Adam feelin But there's rumblings here about 0:41:29.920 --> 0:41:32.799 the fact that Hopkins hasn't gotten any production and that 0:41:32.840 --> 0:41:35.200 he needs to and again, you know he could have 0:41:35.400 --> 0:41:37.520 in the past. Watson has just missed him a couple 0:41:37.560 --> 0:41:40.200 of times, him and Fuller last week, as he explained 0:41:40.280 --> 0:41:43.279 that in that great clip with that reporter. But in 0:41:43.320 --> 0:41:45.040 the end, I think this is gonna be a Mantras game. 0:41:45.160 --> 0:41:47.359 I would I would probably lay it on a Will 0:41:47.360 --> 0:41:49.439 Fuller prop too, because I think both guys are gonna 0:41:49.440 --> 0:41:51.719 have a big one. So you will go with Kyler Murray, 0:41:51.719 --> 0:41:53.160 who I hope you're right by the way, because I 0:41:53.160 --> 0:41:55.120 do have a lot of stocking him in fantasy. I'm 0:41:55.160 --> 0:41:57.399 just going to throw that out there to go over 0:41:57.840 --> 0:42:00.400 three hundred passing yards at plus three fifty, I'm going 0:42:00.400 --> 0:42:02.839 to take DeAndre Hopkins over eighty six and a half 0:42:02.880 --> 0:42:05.920 receiving yards at minus one fourteen. Well, that's going to 0:42:06.000 --> 0:42:07.440 do it for today's show. Thanks for joining me. 0:42:07.480 --> 0:42:07.680 Greg. 0:42:07.719 --> 0:42:09.440 Remind everyone where they can find more of you in 0:42:09.480 --> 0:42:09.880 your work. 0:42:10.080 --> 0:42:13.040 Yeah, definitely. You can find me podcasting over at four 0:42:13.080 --> 0:42:16.120 for four weekly. I do a recap and waiver recommendation 0:42:16.280 --> 0:42:19.239 show early in the week for fantasy football, and then 0:42:19.280 --> 0:42:22.239 on that same feed the most Accurate podcast. You're also 0:42:22.280 --> 0:42:24.400 going to get episodes from John Paulson and Anthony Stalter, 0:42:24.520 --> 0:42:28.040 and if you're familiar with Fantasy pros, Pulson is one 0:42:28.080 --> 0:42:30.120 of the most accurate guys year after years, So definitely 0:42:30.160 --> 0:42:32.239 want to check out our podcast feed over there. You 0:42:32.239 --> 0:42:34.680 can find my weekly rankings for fantasy football over at 0:42:34.719 --> 0:42:37.160 two qbs dot com and then those articles. I try 0:42:37.160 --> 0:42:39.360 to work in a pick or two every week. I 0:42:39.400 --> 0:42:41.920 do a gameplbotics spreadsheet. You'll see me tweet out every 0:42:41.920 --> 0:42:44.160 once in a while. All these DVOA numbers, all these 0:42:44.160 --> 0:42:47.239 point differential numbers, that stuff that I'm pulling directly from 0:42:47.280 --> 0:42:51.319 the spreadsheet. It's publicly available data from football outsiders. I 0:42:51.400 --> 0:42:53.160 color code the spreadsheets so that you can kind of 0:42:53.160 --> 0:42:55.480 see how the teams match up against each other. I 0:42:55.520 --> 0:42:57.319 started making it for myself way back in the day 0:42:57.400 --> 0:42:58.920 just as a tool to use week to week when 0:42:58.960 --> 0:43:01.080 I'm figuring out which I want to use in fantasy, 0:43:01.120 --> 0:43:03.520 which games I want to bet, and I decided, Hey, 0:43:03.600 --> 0:43:05.000 might as well just put this out there for everybody 0:43:05.000 --> 0:43:07.400 to use. So check that out and otherwise follow me 0:43:07.440 --> 0:43:08.480 on Twitter at Gregsauce. 0:43:08.680 --> 0:43:10.799 Yeah, you do awesome work. I really want to make 0:43:10.800 --> 0:43:13.600 sure everybody goes and checks it out because you know, 0:43:13.800 --> 0:43:15.759 I've been following you sort of. You know, this is 0:43:15.760 --> 0:43:17.680 the first time you and I have ever actually talked, 0:43:17.880 --> 0:43:19.520 but I've been following your work for a while, so 0:43:19.640 --> 0:43:21.279 it was really great to have you on I hope 0:43:21.320 --> 0:43:22.440 we can talk again this season. 0:43:22.680 --> 0:43:24.160 Yeah, thanks Sam, good luck with the Scott. 0:43:23.960 --> 0:43:26.600 Fishbol Thanks a lot. I want to remind everyone about 0:43:26.640 --> 0:43:28.880 bet MGM, where you can place your first wager of 0:43:28.960 --> 0:43:32.000 up to five hundred dollars risk free, and don't forget 0:43:32.000 --> 0:43:34.040 to leave us a review on iTunes or Stitcher and 0:43:34.080 --> 0:43:37.520 send a screenshot of that review to contest at bettingpros 0:43:37.560 --> 0:43:40.239 dot com to be entered into our Alvin Kamara signed 0:43:40.239 --> 0:43:42.440 helmet giveaway. Good luck with your wagers this week, and 0:43:42.480 --> 0:43:44.920 my friends, we'll be back breaking down the early lines 0:43:45.120 --> 0:44:00.719 next week, so