WEBVTT - NFL Week 5 Game Lines Reactions (Ep. 14) 0:00:07.240 --> 0:00:09.639 Hey there, everyone, and welcome back to the Betting Pros 0:00:09.720 --> 0:00:13.240 NFL Podcast, brought to you by Bet MGM. I'm your host, 0:00:13.280 --> 0:00:15.240 Dan Harris and you can find me on Twitter at 0:00:15.320 --> 0:00:18.040 Dan Harris Adi. It is time for our early look 0:00:18.040 --> 0:00:20.040 at next week's lines, and with me to break it 0:00:20.079 --> 0:00:23.680 all down is Chris Jamino, director of Premium content over 0:00:23.680 --> 0:00:26.280 at Roto Grinders. You can find him on Twitter at 0:00:26.360 --> 0:00:29.800 Chris Jamino. That's g I M I n OL. Chris. 0:00:29.840 --> 0:00:31.360 Thanks a lot for coming on the show today. How's 0:00:31.360 --> 0:00:32.880 it going, Oh, it's going great. 0:00:32.920 --> 0:00:36.360 I've got minshew Mania and Live bet the Jaguars right 0:00:36.400 --> 0:00:38.720 at the end of that Denver game last week, so 0:00:39.000 --> 0:00:41.080 I ended up making a little bit of a what 0:00:41.159 --> 0:00:43.199 was a pretty bad week otherwise, So I'm ready to 0:00:43.200 --> 0:00:43.800 talk football. 0:00:44.000 --> 0:00:46.199 I'm a little encouraged to hear that you had a 0:00:46.200 --> 0:00:47.880 bad week because I had a terrible week and I 0:00:47.960 --> 0:00:49.720 had been going on a really good run and I'm 0:00:49.760 --> 0:00:52.680 hearing this, frankly from a lot of people. This week 0:00:52.760 --> 0:00:55.000 was just brutal, man. I mean, you know, I didn't 0:00:55.360 --> 0:00:58.000 I tried to stay away from the public whenever I could, 0:00:58.040 --> 0:01:00.400 but I found myself going with you know, a lot 0:01:00.400 --> 0:01:02.920 of the favorites that we're getting a lot of the 0:01:03.000 --> 0:01:06.039 numbers of bets backing, and it was just a brutal 0:01:06.080 --> 0:01:08.600 week for me. So I'm glad other than you managed 0:01:08.600 --> 0:01:11.280 to stalvage a little bit with the Jaguars Broncos game. 0:01:11.480 --> 0:01:13.080 I'm glad to hear that it was also a tough 0:01:13.080 --> 0:01:16.040 week for you, because it really I got my butt kicked. 0:01:16.040 --> 0:01:18.000 I'm not gonna lie about it, but hopefully we can 0:01:18.040 --> 0:01:20.199 turn around here now. I want to say off the bat, 0:01:20.319 --> 0:01:22.120 how excited I am not to have to deal with 0:01:22.120 --> 0:01:25.000 the line on whatever game the Dolphins usually play because 0:01:25.000 --> 0:01:27.560 they're on a bye, because I think we're basically in 0:01:27.760 --> 0:01:30.400 historic territory here with the Finns and I never know 0:01:30.440 --> 0:01:32.880 how to properly analyze align with them. Are you with 0:01:32.959 --> 0:01:35.160 me there by the way that they've basically broken the 0:01:35.240 --> 0:01:36.959 NFL sports betting framework or what? 0:01:37.640 --> 0:01:38.160 No, I'm not. 0:01:38.240 --> 0:01:40.280 I think that their draw of opponents has just been 0:01:40.319 --> 0:01:42.160 brutal to start this season. I think that we're talking 0:01:42.160 --> 0:01:44.680 about some really good teams that they've seen so far. Now, 0:01:44.680 --> 0:01:47.360 I do think they're bad. I don't think they're historically bad, 0:01:47.400 --> 0:01:50.520 but they're definitely near the bottom. I mean, I look 0:01:50.560 --> 0:01:52.240 at this team over and I don't see a lot 0:01:52.240 --> 0:01:55.840 of redeeming qualities. But I don't know if I'm necessarily 0:01:56.040 --> 0:01:58.800 in agreement that this is some sort of historically bad team, 0:01:58.800 --> 0:02:00.480 at least not the very worst team you've seen. I mean, 0:02:00.760 --> 0:02:02.000 you know, back in the day, there were some pretty 0:02:02.000 --> 0:02:03.480 bad Saints teams and stuff. So I don't know if 0:02:03.480 --> 0:02:04.320 this is the worst one ever. 0:02:04.560 --> 0:02:06.560 I think that's fair to me. I don't know, man, 0:02:06.680 --> 0:02:08.800 when I'm looking at them, I'm wondering where they're going 0:02:08.840 --> 0:02:11.600 to rank historically in terrible teams. And regardless, the bottom 0:02:11.639 --> 0:02:13.799 line is that every single week I see value in 0:02:13.880 --> 0:02:17.200 the line and I can't bring myself to pull the 0:02:17.240 --> 0:02:19.600 trigger on it. Which has been good, but I don't 0:02:19.639 --> 0:02:21.880 know how high the lines need to get for me 0:02:21.919 --> 0:02:24.359 to feel comfortable with them. But regardless, today you and 0:02:24.440 --> 0:02:26.040 I are going to go through each game. Now, we're 0:02:26.040 --> 0:02:28.720 going to be using the consensus odds over at bettingpros 0:02:28.760 --> 0:02:31.000 dot com. That's an aggregation of the odds that are 0:02:31.000 --> 0:02:33.480 available on the market. As always, there are going to 0:02:33.520 --> 0:02:36.440 be differences at the various sports books, so shop around 0:02:36.760 --> 0:02:38.760 for the best odds. Also, if you want to see 0:02:38.760 --> 0:02:41.160 how some of the top sports betting experts are leaning 0:02:41.200 --> 0:02:44.560 on any given bet at any given time. Bettingpros dot 0:02:44.560 --> 0:02:46.840 Com is going to show you that too. All right, Chris, 0:02:46.880 --> 0:02:48.679 let's slide right in here with the Rams at the 0:02:48.720 --> 0:02:51.240 Seahawks on Thursday night. Now, this line, as far as 0:02:51.280 --> 0:02:53.520 I can tell, it has bounced around a ton. I 0:02:53.520 --> 0:02:55.920 think the early look at the Rams favored by at 0:02:56.000 --> 0:02:57.880 least a couple of points. I checked last night and 0:02:57.919 --> 0:03:00.600 the Rams were favored by one. But now these Seahawks 0:03:00.840 --> 0:03:03.440 are favored by one and the over under is forty nine. 0:03:03.520 --> 0:03:06.360 You have any major reaction to that line. 0:03:06.320 --> 0:03:08.400 Yeah, this might be one of my favorite spots that 0:03:08.440 --> 0:03:09.960 I've looked at so far earlier in the week. I 0:03:10.000 --> 0:03:12.480 just think that the Rams are going to be undervalued 0:03:12.480 --> 0:03:14.760 at this point after the performance they had last week 0:03:14.800 --> 0:03:18.280 against Jameis Winston. You know, the defense definitely let them down. 0:03:18.280 --> 0:03:23.000 Marcus Peters got shredded for a long touchdown by Mike Evans. 0:03:23.120 --> 0:03:25.160 You know, there was just a lot of breakdowns and 0:03:25.200 --> 0:03:28.400 some turnovers that really made this team look pretty bad. 0:03:28.480 --> 0:03:30.519 I think that's probably what we're seeing here as the 0:03:30.560 --> 0:03:32.440 line fluctuates back and forth. But at the end of 0:03:32.440 --> 0:03:34.960 the day, if we're going to give the Seahawks favorite 0:03:34.960 --> 0:03:37.000 status here, then I'm definitely going to take the Rams 0:03:37.120 --> 0:03:38.280 on the money line straight up. 0:03:38.720 --> 0:03:40.960 Yeah, I don't. I mean, look, when you're moving from 0:03:41.120 --> 0:03:43.360 minus one from the Rams to minus one from the Seahawks, 0:03:43.400 --> 0:03:45.680 it doesn't really do anything, you know, it's kind of 0:03:45.680 --> 0:03:48.080 a meaningless move when you're looking at the spread. But 0:03:48.200 --> 0:03:51.160 I do think that this is an overreaction to yesterday's game. 0:03:51.160 --> 0:03:52.760 I don't know what that was. I mean, it was 0:03:52.920 --> 0:03:55.839 shocking basically how bad the Rams defense was ripped apart 0:03:55.880 --> 0:03:58.560 by Jameis Winston. But really in the other end, I mean, 0:03:58.600 --> 0:04:00.760 maybe people are reading a bit too much into it. 0:04:00.960 --> 0:04:02.480 From the Seahawks side of it as well. They have 0:04:02.560 --> 0:04:05.960 a pretty convincing win over and admittedly bad Arizona team. 0:04:06.200 --> 0:04:09.400 I think the difference is that realistically, the Seahawks have 0:04:09.600 --> 0:04:12.520 not looked very good, and they didn't even look great 0:04:13.000 --> 0:04:16.160 yesterday against Arizona. They did get the defensive touchdown where 0:04:16.200 --> 0:04:18.120 Clowning made the great play on the screen, but you know, 0:04:18.200 --> 0:04:19.919 other than that, you know, I think they put up 0:04:19.960 --> 0:04:22.440 twenty seven points, So I think they put up twenty overall, 0:04:22.520 --> 0:04:25.680 not an overly impressive showing, so I'm inclined to agree 0:04:25.680 --> 0:04:27.280 with you. The total doesn't jump out at me, But 0:04:27.320 --> 0:04:29.840 for me, I'm definitely seeing value on the Rams here 0:04:29.880 --> 0:04:31.800 at the early number, and I don't know which way 0:04:31.800 --> 0:04:34.440 it's going to go because it really has bounced back 0:04:34.440 --> 0:04:36.680 and forth pretty quickly. Of course that there's in that game, 0:04:36.720 --> 0:04:38.760 there's not much more time for it to go. But 0:04:38.880 --> 0:04:41.400 either way, I agree with you. I certainly see value 0:04:41.400 --> 0:04:43.600 on the Rams. Let's move on to the Bills at 0:04:43.600 --> 0:04:45.840 the Titans. The Titans here are laying two and a 0:04:45.920 --> 0:04:48.760 half and the over unders at a pretty low thirty 0:04:48.800 --> 0:04:50.840 eight and a half. Obviously, there's a question mark right 0:04:50.880 --> 0:04:53.799 now around Josh Allen, who remains in the concussion protocol. 0:04:53.880 --> 0:04:56.200 You've got two strong defenses, and to be fair, I 0:04:56.279 --> 0:04:58.720 undersold the Bills defense completely. I thought the Pats were 0:04:58.720 --> 0:05:01.200 going to go up there and be able to cover 0:05:01.240 --> 0:05:03.760 that spread of seven. They really could have lost that 0:05:03.760 --> 0:05:06.080 game pretty easily. But what's the reaction here, Titans laying 0:05:06.080 --> 0:05:08.440 two and a half over under at thirty eight and 0:05:08.440 --> 0:05:08.799 a half. 0:05:09.279 --> 0:05:09.479 Yeah. 0:05:09.520 --> 0:05:11.719 I like the Titans last week because I didn't think 0:05:11.760 --> 0:05:14.520 the type of offense that Atlanta I was bringing to 0:05:14.560 --> 0:05:17.120 the table you know, if you know, presuming that they 0:05:17.160 --> 0:05:19.200 could find a way to take the deep ball away 0:05:19.560 --> 0:05:22.560 from Julio and Ridley, then I thought that the Titans 0:05:22.640 --> 0:05:25.120 defense was going to be a good matchup for the Falcons, 0:05:25.160 --> 0:05:26.880 and I like the Titans last week. I don't think 0:05:27.040 --> 0:05:28.640 the same is true at all for Buffalo. If Josh 0:05:28.680 --> 0:05:30.640 Allen's back, right, I do think that you know, John 0:05:30.680 --> 0:05:32.640 Brown basically is a specialist in the deep ball, and 0:05:32.839 --> 0:05:35.000 you know, Malcolm Butler is just completely capable of being 0:05:35.040 --> 0:05:36.800 torched in any spot. I don't want to get to, 0:05:37.279 --> 0:05:40.120 you know, bogged down on rating a team based on 0:05:40.120 --> 0:05:42.560 one offensive matchup. I do really think that the biggest 0:05:42.560 --> 0:05:44.560 advantage for this game, of any side is going to 0:05:44.600 --> 0:05:46.719 be the Bills defense against this Titans offense. You know, 0:05:46.760 --> 0:05:49.040 the Falcons defense was missing a ton of characters last week. 0:05:49.080 --> 0:05:52.080 They were able to get shredded and give up, you know, 0:05:52.080 --> 0:05:54.039 get some big plays against that Atlanta defense. I do 0:05:54.120 --> 0:05:56.320 not think that will be the case against Buffalo. Buffalo 0:05:56.360 --> 0:05:59.120 specializes in preventing such big plays. So at the end 0:05:59.120 --> 0:06:00.800 of the day, I do you think Buffalo is at 0:06:00.839 --> 0:06:02.160 the advantage here? And I like them in the. 0:06:02.120 --> 0:06:04.720 Spot out of curiosity does the fact that Allen is 0:06:04.760 --> 0:06:06.600 in the concussion protocol, what do you do with that 0:06:06.720 --> 0:06:08.840 as a better Do you just wait and hold on, 0:06:08.880 --> 0:06:10.760 do you try to get in on it now and 0:06:10.800 --> 0:06:12.839 hope for the best, or how do you approach that well? 0:06:12.880 --> 0:06:14.120 I think I want to watch that game one more 0:06:14.120 --> 0:06:17.440 time because Matt Barkley to me looked way more competent 0:06:17.480 --> 0:06:19.280 than I ever saw him or thought of him before. 0:06:19.279 --> 0:06:20.960 And I think the same was true in the preseason 0:06:20.960 --> 0:06:23.440 when I saw Barkley operate this offense. So I really 0:06:23.440 --> 0:06:25.880 want to get a good look at how that offense 0:06:25.920 --> 0:06:28.640 looks with him. There could be some value. Here's what 0:06:28.680 --> 0:06:31.440 I'm saying is if the public doesn't think he's, you know, 0:06:31.520 --> 0:06:33.479 ready for prime time, ready to step in there and 0:06:33.480 --> 0:06:35.040 do the job, I really think the Bills would win 0:06:35.040 --> 0:06:37.040 this game on defense anyway, So as long as he's 0:06:37.040 --> 0:06:39.240 able to manage the game, I would still not be 0:06:39.279 --> 0:06:42.159 shying away from Buffalo, just purely on the presence of 0:06:42.160 --> 0:06:44.159 Matt Barkley. I don't think Josh Allen's that great of 0:06:44.200 --> 0:06:46.279 a quarterback either, so I don't know if the jump 0:06:46.320 --> 0:06:48.479 is as big as people would expect from Barkley to Allen. 0:06:48.480 --> 0:06:49.840 Maybe that's a hot take, but that's just how. 0:06:49.760 --> 0:06:52.760 I feel now. I mean, look from a fantasy perspective. 0:06:52.760 --> 0:06:55.320 You and I both do fantasy work. Of course, Allan 0:06:55.600 --> 0:06:57.719 is great because he provides you know, value with his 0:06:57.800 --> 0:07:00.680 rushing ability. But he is one of the least accurate 0:07:00.720 --> 0:07:02.680 passers in the NFL. There's no doubt about that. And 0:07:02.720 --> 0:07:05.760 when Barkley stepped in, yeah, he looked better overall than 0:07:05.800 --> 0:07:08.040 Alan did. Really in that game, he moved the ball 0:07:08.240 --> 0:07:11.680 relatively well considering he was thrown into the Lions then 0:07:11.680 --> 0:07:13.760 there against the Pats, But I agree, I don't expect 0:07:13.800 --> 0:07:16.200 it to have too much of an impact on the 0:07:16.240 --> 0:07:19.240 spread here, even though quarterbacks can Barkley again, with how 0:07:19.280 --> 0:07:21.480 he looked. You mentioned the preseason as well, and he 0:07:21.480 --> 0:07:23.560 looked fine against New England, I'm not sure it would 0:07:23.560 --> 0:07:25.640 have that big of an impact. Let's move on here 0:07:25.680 --> 0:07:28.640 to the Falcons at the Texans. The Texans here are 0:07:28.720 --> 0:07:30.560 laying four and a half and the over under his 0:07:30.600 --> 0:07:33.320 forty nine, two teams coming off really bad losses. The 0:07:33.400 --> 0:07:36.119 Falcons look kind of in disarray. The defense is really 0:07:36.120 --> 0:07:38.559 compromised without Ken O'Neil in there. How are you feeling 0:07:38.560 --> 0:07:40.480 about this when Texans laying four and a half at 0:07:40.480 --> 0:07:41.800 home over under forty nine. 0:07:42.160 --> 0:07:43.960 Yeah, I mean the total is definitely the thing I'd 0:07:43.960 --> 0:07:45.680 be looking at first here. I mean, I'm not so 0:07:45.800 --> 0:07:48.600 sure that I think the Falcons are that good of 0:07:48.600 --> 0:07:50.960 a team. They're one in three and they're just really 0:07:51.000 --> 0:07:53.440 really brutal on defense, and the Texans offense is probably 0:07:53.480 --> 0:07:56.120 capable of getting their share of the points in this game. 0:07:56.280 --> 0:07:58.080 The question is whether the Falcons can put up the 0:07:58.080 --> 0:07:59.760 points on the Texans, and that's why be looking at 0:07:59.760 --> 0:08:02.520 the It's a pretty good line at forty nine. I'm 0:08:02.520 --> 0:08:05.000 not excited to get the over on this, but I 0:08:05.000 --> 0:08:06.760 think if I was leading in anything right now, would 0:08:06.800 --> 0:08:09.160 be you know, can the Falcons get the job done 0:08:09.160 --> 0:08:11.800 against his Texans defense? And then then I would be interested, 0:08:11.840 --> 0:08:12.560 of course in the over. 0:08:13.160 --> 0:08:16.200 Yeah. I mean the Texans have been a little disappointing 0:08:16.280 --> 0:08:18.080 on offense, at least to me. I mean, I know, 0:08:18.160 --> 0:08:21.239 you know, the problems with the offensive line. Watson's holding 0:08:21.240 --> 0:08:23.520 the ball for way too long, so they aren't putting 0:08:23.600 --> 0:08:26.360 up the points. And you know, they've played some tough 0:08:26.360 --> 0:08:28.840 defenses here. They played the Jaguars, of course, where they 0:08:28.840 --> 0:08:31.000 weren't able to do much they played the Panthers, and 0:08:31.000 --> 0:08:33.640 the Panthers have a solid defense mostly against the pass, 0:08:33.760 --> 0:08:36.040 less against the run, which is sort of, you know, 0:08:36.240 --> 0:08:38.840 really goes against what the Texans can do. They don't 0:08:38.880 --> 0:08:41.560 run the ball that well with Hide and Duke Johnson. 0:08:41.559 --> 0:08:44.360 It's fine, but it's not their strength over here. Yeah, 0:08:44.400 --> 0:08:46.600 I didn't have a strong lean when I first looked 0:08:46.600 --> 0:08:50.480 at this game. I mean, forty nine, it's around kind 0:08:50.480 --> 0:08:51.839 of where I expected to be in the four and 0:08:51.840 --> 0:08:54.440 a half is fine, but really I'm wondering whether the 0:08:54.480 --> 0:08:59.200 Falcons here are gonna kind of start really really tailing off, 0:08:59.280 --> 0:09:02.080 because I think they just cannot get it going. Yesterday, 0:09:02.120 --> 0:09:05.160 they you know, barely anything to Julio Jones. Ridley has 0:09:05.200 --> 0:09:07.720 basically been phased out at this point. Austin Hooper is 0:09:07.720 --> 0:09:09.679 having a great year, but they're really not going to 0:09:09.679 --> 0:09:13.040 be able to sustain an offensive philosophy dumping the ball 0:09:13.080 --> 0:09:15.400 off to Demonta Freeman constantly and going through Austin Hooper. 0:09:15.440 --> 0:09:17.520 So for me, I'm not quite as confident this. I 0:09:17.559 --> 0:09:19.720 really want to go back and watch yesterday's game, but 0:09:19.800 --> 0:09:22.240 it's something where I don't have a strong lean on 0:09:22.320 --> 0:09:23.960 it as of yet. But it has not moved as 0:09:24.000 --> 0:09:25.600 far as I can tell from the look aheadline, so 0:09:25.640 --> 0:09:27.959 I think this is probably in the end four and 0:09:27.960 --> 0:09:30.280 a half and over under forty nine is basically around 0:09:30.280 --> 0:09:32.280 where it's going to get up, give or take half 0:09:32.320 --> 0:09:34.880 a point. Let's move on here to a divisional matchup 0:09:34.960 --> 0:09:38.160 Ravens at the Steelers. The Ravens are currently minus four 0:09:38.200 --> 0:09:40.000 and the over under is at forty two and a half. 0:09:40.080 --> 0:09:43.240 Now we're recording this before the Monday night game, so obviously, 0:09:43.240 --> 0:09:45.920 if there are any significant developments on the Steelers side 0:09:45.920 --> 0:09:47.920 of the ball, the line could move. Two teams who 0:09:47.960 --> 0:09:50.439 know each other really well. They always battle out close. 0:09:50.679 --> 0:09:52.720 How are you feeling about this one? Ravens minus four 0:09:52.960 --> 0:09:53.920 at Pittsburgh. 0:09:54.240 --> 0:09:57.600 Yeah, the Pittsburgh defense is a pretty good unit. But 0:09:57.920 --> 0:10:00.640 I still think that if we're talking about, you know, 0:10:00.720 --> 0:10:02.560 just a four point favorite for the Ravens, I think 0:10:02.559 --> 0:10:05.280 that overall there's still a much better team. If their 0:10:05.679 --> 0:10:08.640 defensive health improves at all, I would really like them 0:10:08.640 --> 0:10:11.319 in the spot at minus four. I certainly don't think 0:10:11.360 --> 0:10:16.800 that Pittsburgh under Mason Rudolph's command is necessarily a strong 0:10:16.840 --> 0:10:17.160 team to. 0:10:17.160 --> 0:10:17.840 Be betting right now. 0:10:17.880 --> 0:10:19.520 I don't know what they are, yet I don't really 0:10:19.520 --> 0:10:22.040 have a strong take on whether or not they can 0:10:22.080 --> 0:10:24.360 cover a spread versus a team like the Ravens. But 0:10:24.480 --> 0:10:26.800 I think the Ravens underperformed this week, and I think 0:10:26.840 --> 0:10:29.760 that they might have otherwise been bigger favorites here. So 0:10:29.840 --> 0:10:32.600 minus four is something I would possibly be looking at here. 0:10:32.800 --> 0:10:35.480 I'm really surprised that the spread isn't higher. I mean, 0:10:35.679 --> 0:10:37.520 you know, because it's not as if it came down 0:10:37.920 --> 0:10:40.160 when the Ravens just got their butts kicked by the Browns. 0:10:40.200 --> 0:10:42.480 I mean, it was kind of I think the look 0:10:42.520 --> 0:10:45.520 headline was relatively where it was. I think, if anything, 0:10:45.720 --> 0:10:48.840 it leaned a little bit closer towards the Ravens here. 0:10:49.080 --> 0:10:51.480 For me, I don't know. My initial gut on this 0:10:51.559 --> 0:10:53.040 is that there's going to be money that comes in 0:10:53.040 --> 0:10:55.040 on the Ravens that's going to push it a little 0:10:55.040 --> 0:10:58.720 bit higher and the over under. Neither one of these 0:10:58.760 --> 0:11:02.400 teams has a defense that is particularly good at this point. 0:11:02.480 --> 0:11:04.800 I mean, the Ravens, as you mentioned, are banged up, 0:11:05.000 --> 0:11:06.959 but you knew coming in that their defense was not 0:11:07.000 --> 0:11:08.760 going to be as strong as it has been in 0:11:08.840 --> 0:11:11.280 previous years, and I think that's showing itself to be 0:11:11.280 --> 0:11:13.280 true right now. Now. Whether or not the Steelers are 0:11:13.320 --> 0:11:15.440 able to move the ball against them, there's a whole 0:11:15.559 --> 0:11:18.040 nother question, but that's more about the Steelers offense. I 0:11:18.080 --> 0:11:21.000 think Mason Rudolph, who has not looked good, will get 0:11:21.040 --> 0:11:23.440 better as he gets more comfortable playing in the NFL. 0:11:23.480 --> 0:11:25.640 But for me, both the numbers stood out to me. 0:11:25.920 --> 0:11:29.040 At the Ravens laying four seemed light, and I felt 0:11:29.040 --> 0:11:30.559 like the over under at forty two and a half 0:11:30.640 --> 0:11:32.520 also seemed light. Out of curiosity, do you have any 0:11:32.520 --> 0:11:34.640 feel on that over under? Is that about right where 0:11:34.679 --> 0:11:35.520 you think it should be? 0:11:35.840 --> 0:11:36.920 I mean, that's about right. 0:11:36.960 --> 0:11:38.760 Like I said, the defense for the Steelers is a 0:11:38.760 --> 0:11:40.840 pretty good unit, so I would not be expecting a 0:11:40.840 --> 0:11:42.520 ton of scoring in this game. That seems right to me. 0:11:42.800 --> 0:11:44.760 You know, It's worth noting that like this is going 0:11:44.840 --> 0:11:46.880 to be a very public side. Looks like tons of 0:11:46.880 --> 0:11:50.400 money rolling in on the Ravens already as a percentage, 0:11:50.600 --> 0:11:52.199 and the number of bets as well. 0:11:52.240 --> 0:11:54.280 So I'm just do you draw conclusions from that out 0:11:54.280 --> 0:11:57.559 of curiosity this early on in the week, because I'm. 0:11:57.320 --> 0:11:59.360 Not really I mean, I'm just pointing out that that's 0:11:59.400 --> 0:12:02.280 the trend is that the public side is probably going 0:12:02.280 --> 0:12:04.800 to end up being the Ravens side unless this line 0:12:04.840 --> 0:12:08.840 moves significantly. And I don't know, I just I don't 0:12:08.880 --> 0:12:12.080 love just like completely getting a lot of money on 0:12:12.160 --> 0:12:14.200 bets that are just like purely public that the books 0:12:14.440 --> 0:12:17.720 are knowing that they're going to need for their particular week. 0:12:17.760 --> 0:12:19.280 I mean, at the end of the day, that's just 0:12:19.640 --> 0:12:21.760 it doesn't seem like good process right to be that 0:12:22.320 --> 0:12:24.040 far against the book. I mean, the book definitely knows 0:12:24.040 --> 0:12:24.960 what they're getting into here. 0:12:25.080 --> 0:12:28.000 Absolutely, numbers like this scare me a little bit when 0:12:28.040 --> 0:12:30.360 I have a very strong feeling on it, because I 0:12:30.400 --> 0:12:32.400 feel like, exactly as you said, this strikes me as 0:12:32.440 --> 0:12:34.160 a number that I think that John Q. Public is 0:12:34.200 --> 0:12:35.959 going to look at it, and maybe the books are 0:12:35.960 --> 0:12:38.200 banking on the fact that the Ravens look so terrible 0:12:38.200 --> 0:12:40.319 against the Browns that they're not going to get all 0:12:40.320 --> 0:12:42.920 that much money. I don't really think that's necessarily going 0:12:42.960 --> 0:12:44.520 to be the case. I think a team like the Ravens, 0:12:44.559 --> 0:12:47.160 given how they performed early on and they lost a 0:12:47.200 --> 0:12:49.160 close game to the Chiefs, I think the public is 0:12:49.160 --> 0:12:50.440 still going to be on them. So when I see 0:12:50.440 --> 0:12:54.680 these numbers. They strike me as it's likely that the 0:12:54.760 --> 0:12:57.160 number of bets and you know, we'll see about the money, 0:12:57.160 --> 0:12:59.040 because that's more about the sharp betters. But the number 0:12:59.080 --> 0:13:00.800 of bets is going to be wrongly in favor of 0:13:00.840 --> 0:13:03.160 the Ravens, which makes me a little worried because that's 0:13:03.320 --> 0:13:06.000 how I initially lean, and you really don't lose money 0:13:06.000 --> 0:13:08.000 when you fade the public. So it is something that 0:13:08.040 --> 0:13:10.920 I think this line is certainly capable of moving, depending 0:13:10.960 --> 0:13:12.959 on how the money comes in. Let's move on here 0:13:12.960 --> 0:13:15.600 to the Patriots at the Redskins. The Patriots are currently 0:13:15.679 --> 0:13:18.160 laying fifteen and a half. Now, this was fourteen and 0:13:18.200 --> 0:13:21.040 a half when I checked yesterday. The over under is 0:13:21.200 --> 0:13:23.360 forty four and a half. Last I saw Jay Gruden 0:13:23.400 --> 0:13:27.600 decline to name a starter. If he does name Haskins, 0:13:27.640 --> 0:13:31.080 I would assume the spread it would probably jump in 0:13:31.120 --> 0:13:33.600 favor of the Patriots by maybe a point or something 0:13:33.640 --> 0:13:35.960 like that. And even though case Keenum did not look 0:13:36.000 --> 0:13:38.040 all that good. So Patriots on the road here at 0:13:38.040 --> 0:13:40.520 the Redskins laying fifteen and a half with a total 0:13:40.720 --> 0:13:42.080 of forty four and a half. How do you feel 0:13:42.080 --> 0:13:42.480 about that? 0:13:43.520 --> 0:13:46.440 Do you think the Patriots will score forty four points 0:13:46.480 --> 0:13:50.000 or forty five points, because I just have no confidence 0:13:50.040 --> 0:13:52.720 whatsoever in the Washington offense in the spot. Just just 0:13:52.720 --> 0:13:55.720 give me the under here until I can convince myself 0:13:55.760 --> 0:13:58.400 the Patriots are going to score more than whatever whatever 0:13:58.440 --> 0:14:01.080 the total is, because I really think shutout is well 0:14:01.080 --> 0:14:02.640 within the range of outcomes here for watching it. 0:14:02.640 --> 0:14:03.200 That will happen. 0:14:03.280 --> 0:14:06.280 But I mean, will they score ten points? I would 0:14:06.320 --> 0:14:07.840 not bet the over on ten I don't think. I 0:14:07.840 --> 0:14:10.320 really think that this defense is very good and the 0:14:10.360 --> 0:14:11.960 Washington offense is very bad. 0:14:12.200 --> 0:14:15.720 Yeah, don't sell it short. A shutout could legitimately happen here. 0:14:15.720 --> 0:14:18.040 I mean, especially if it's Haskins throwing themall. I mean, look, 0:14:18.120 --> 0:14:22.160 they were they allowed their first you know, offensive touchdown 0:14:22.480 --> 0:14:25.200 against the Bills, but they held them in check entirely. 0:14:25.240 --> 0:14:29.000 They faced a run of really bad opponents, Steelers perhaps 0:14:29.080 --> 0:14:31.440 being the exception in opening week. But that defense is 0:14:31.520 --> 0:14:35.440 one hundred percent legitimate. So, I mean, honestly, out of curiosity, 0:14:35.520 --> 0:14:37.920 if you are analyzing the game that way, which I 0:14:37.920 --> 0:14:40.880 think it's one hundred percent correct, what's wrong with the 0:14:40.920 --> 0:14:42.680 Pats laying fifteen and a half? I mean, the Pats 0:14:42.680 --> 0:14:44.960 are going to score you know, they had a tough 0:14:45.000 --> 0:14:47.640 Bills team and they scored sixteen and they looked terrible. 0:14:47.720 --> 0:14:49.840 I mean, do you think they're gonna probably wind up 0:14:49.880 --> 0:14:52.480 coming up putting up above twenty above, you know, twenty 0:14:52.520 --> 0:14:54.000 four or something like that here. 0:14:55.080 --> 0:14:57.320 Boy, you know, I just don't. I don't like to 0:14:57.320 --> 0:14:59.160 get involved with Patriots long. I don't know what it 0:14:59.200 --> 0:15:01.520 is about these Patriot lines when you're talking about like 0:15:01.560 --> 0:15:04.320 because in theory, when you see an NFL team getting 0:15:04.320 --> 0:15:05.720 two touchdowns, you're not supposed to like that. 0:15:05.800 --> 0:15:07.520 I don't think that's what I was saying with the 0:15:07.560 --> 0:15:09.960 Dolphins where I don't. I never like it, and so 0:15:10.000 --> 0:15:12.400 I'm always like, man, there's value here in the Dolphins, 0:15:12.560 --> 0:15:15.680 and that's why I meant like, I cannot take them. Look, Washington, 0:15:16.080 --> 0:15:18.440 they're not anywhere close to that at this point. But 0:15:18.480 --> 0:15:20.640 if they throw Haskins into there, and you know, the 0:15:20.680 --> 0:15:24.520 problem was Jay grun I think did this correctly. Okay, 0:15:24.560 --> 0:15:28.280 he did not throw Haskins into that Monday night game 0:15:28.280 --> 0:15:31.040 against the Bears, right because he would have gotten absolutely destroyed. 0:15:31.200 --> 0:15:33.240 Keenan was terrible in this game against the Giants. The 0:15:33.280 --> 0:15:35.880 Giants have a terrible defense. They threw them out there like, Okay, 0:15:35.880 --> 0:15:38.400 this is it. It's a weak defense, and he was awful. 0:15:38.440 --> 0:15:41.240 I mean that the Redskins really there was no Terry McLaurin, 0:15:41.320 --> 0:15:44.600 to be fair, but the Redskins could be approaching not 0:15:44.800 --> 0:15:47.640 Dolphin level, because I think Dolphins level is really bad, 0:15:47.640 --> 0:15:49.560 but they could be a team that you're gonna be 0:15:49.600 --> 0:15:52.560 seeing these spreads that are going to be pushing sixteen seventeen. 0:15:52.600 --> 0:15:54.280 And I agree, I don't really like to get involved 0:15:54.280 --> 0:15:57.160 in it, although I'll be honest, this one piques my 0:15:57.200 --> 0:15:58.800 interest a little bit. I think it's gonna rise, by 0:15:58.840 --> 0:16:00.840 the way. I think whatever happens, I think when this closes, 0:16:00.840 --> 0:16:02.280 it is going to be more like sixteen and a 0:16:02.320 --> 0:16:04.440 half or something like that. But we'll have to see. 0:16:04.440 --> 0:16:07.240 But you're saying, essentially you like the total at least 0:16:07.280 --> 0:16:09.920 on an initial glance, right, because you think essentially that 0:16:10.000 --> 0:16:12.240 Washington's going to have trouble scoring. And I think you're 0:16:12.240 --> 0:16:14.120 putting it probably on the Patriots, let's say, to be 0:16:14.160 --> 0:16:16.640