WEBVTT - Week 7 NFL Lookahead (Ep 222)

0:00:00.840 --> 0:00:03.280
<v Speaker 1>It's time to place your bets. Welcome in, everybody to

0:00:03.320 --> 0:00:06.480
<v Speaker 1>Betting Pros. It's me Joey pa Joe Pisapia, and already

0:00:06.760 --> 0:00:10.320
<v Speaker 1>it's time to look ahead to Week seven in the NFL.

0:00:10.440 --> 0:00:14.520
<v Speaker 1>Week six had some wacky moments, certainly some upsets. Certainly

0:00:14.560 --> 0:00:17.319
<v Speaker 1>some people who are not in the good graces with

0:00:17.400 --> 0:00:21.079
<v Speaker 1>their respective teams as of this point. But luckily that's

0:00:21.120 --> 0:00:23.720
<v Speaker 1>not the case here. I love my team. I've got

0:00:23.760 --> 0:00:26.480
<v Speaker 1>Pat Fitzmorris, I've got Matthew Friedman, I've got the crew

0:00:26.520 --> 0:00:29.280
<v Speaker 1>to break it all down. Certainly, last week we made

0:00:29.280 --> 0:00:31.320
<v Speaker 1>some money on the early look ahead, and hopefully we

0:00:31.360 --> 0:00:33.920
<v Speaker 1>could do that again with my boys today. And don't

0:00:33.920 --> 0:00:36.280
<v Speaker 1>forget all of our great content going on here over

0:00:36.360 --> 0:00:38.919
<v Speaker 1>at Bettingpros dot com, so check that out, check out

0:00:38.960 --> 0:00:41.879
<v Speaker 1>the prop bet cheat sheet, and obviously everything here we

0:00:41.920 --> 0:00:44.920
<v Speaker 1>do is sponsored by BETTMGM, the King of sports books.

0:00:44.920 --> 0:00:46.920
<v Speaker 1>Everybody knows that maybe I'll put on the crown later,

0:00:46.960 --> 0:00:50.599
<v Speaker 1>we'll see how the show goes. But Pat Fitzmorris, Matthew Friedman,

0:00:50.840 --> 0:00:53.440
<v Speaker 1>let's just jump in head first. Let's go right into

0:00:53.440 --> 0:00:56.440
<v Speaker 1>the pool and look ahead at Thursday night football, because goodness, knows.

0:00:56.800 --> 0:00:59.600
<v Speaker 1>We need a better Thursday night football game. It can't

0:00:59.600 --> 0:01:02.120
<v Speaker 1>get worse. That's what I told myself last Thursday, and

0:01:02.160 --> 0:01:04.080
<v Speaker 1>I don't know if I was right or wrong. New

0:01:04.200 --> 0:01:07.679
<v Speaker 1>Orleans Arizona. That's what we have this week. Arizona is

0:01:07.720 --> 0:01:10.880
<v Speaker 1>two point favorites at home. The Saints continue to scuffle.

0:01:10.959 --> 0:01:13.760
<v Speaker 1>Both teams are two and four. The number is forty five.

0:01:14.160 --> 0:01:16.319
<v Speaker 1>If you like New Orleans on the money line, it's

0:01:16.319 --> 0:01:19.800
<v Speaker 1>plus one twelve. So Pat Fitzmorris, Thursday night has not

0:01:19.920 --> 0:01:23.840
<v Speaker 1>been great for football. Let's just leave it at that.

0:01:24.680 --> 0:01:27.080
<v Speaker 1>This game right here, is it great for a betting

0:01:27.120 --> 0:01:28.880
<v Speaker 1>standpoint when you're looking ahead.

0:01:28.959 --> 0:01:30.520
<v Speaker 2>It could be, And it could be great from a

0:01:30.520 --> 0:01:34.080
<v Speaker 2>Twitter standpoint, getting to criticize Cliff Kingsbury all night and

0:01:34.840 --> 0:01:38.920
<v Speaker 2>the watch the barbs flying on Twitter. So you know,

0:01:39.319 --> 0:01:41.480
<v Speaker 2>that's the great thing about Thursday night games, Joe, even

0:01:41.520 --> 0:01:44.000
<v Speaker 2>if the football is not good, Twitter is a fun

0:01:44.080 --> 0:01:47.840
<v Speaker 2>place during a bad Thursday night game. So we could

0:01:47.920 --> 0:01:50.920
<v Speaker 2>get that again this week. And I kind of like

0:01:50.960 --> 0:01:53.760
<v Speaker 2>the Saints as a dog here. I mean like Arizona

0:01:53.840 --> 0:01:57.120
<v Speaker 2>has just been such an underachiever. The offense is just

0:01:58.200 --> 0:02:00.720
<v Speaker 2>it's stuck in the mud. There have been times where

0:02:00.720 --> 0:02:04.160
<v Speaker 2>they get into the second half and Kyler is basically

0:02:04.280 --> 0:02:06.240
<v Speaker 2>drawing up plays in the dirt and it works. Like

0:02:06.280 --> 0:02:08.960
<v Speaker 2>the comeback victory against the Raiders. That's as good as

0:02:08.960 --> 0:02:11.280
<v Speaker 2>the offense has looked all year, and it was total

0:02:11.320 --> 0:02:14.320
<v Speaker 2>school yard football, like the scripted stuff early on with

0:02:14.360 --> 0:02:18.079
<v Speaker 2>Cliff not working. It'll be interesting to see how the

0:02:18.120 --> 0:02:21.600
<v Speaker 2>return of DeAndre Hopkins this week changes the dynamic. But

0:02:21.639 --> 0:02:25.280
<v Speaker 2>they did lose Hollywood Brown to what looks like it's

0:02:25.280 --> 0:02:27.080
<v Speaker 2>going to be a multi week foot injury.

0:02:28.160 --> 0:02:30.000
<v Speaker 3>The Saints have been pretty scrappy.

0:02:30.400 --> 0:02:32.720
<v Speaker 2>We still don't know what is going on with them

0:02:32.720 --> 0:02:35.119
<v Speaker 2>at quarterback, whether Jamis Winston is going to be back

0:02:35.120 --> 0:02:38.040
<v Speaker 2>in Week seven, but they've been good offensively with Andy

0:02:38.120 --> 0:02:41.200
<v Speaker 2>Dalton at quarterback the last few weeks, and really they

0:02:41.639 --> 0:02:44.639
<v Speaker 2>haven't played a bad game since that Week two toast

0:02:44.639 --> 0:02:50.000
<v Speaker 2>stubbing against the Panthers. So I like this plucky Saints

0:02:50.040 --> 0:02:54.200
<v Speaker 2>team that's reasonably respectable on both sides of the ball

0:02:54.240 --> 0:02:58.680
<v Speaker 2>against a Cardinals team that kind of isn't respectable on

0:02:58.760 --> 0:02:59.720
<v Speaker 2>either side of the ball.

0:02:59.880 --> 0:03:02.440
<v Speaker 3>I just think this game is sort of mispriced.

0:03:02.720 --> 0:03:04.720
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I kind of feel the same way Friedman. I

0:03:04.720 --> 0:03:06.760
<v Speaker 1>know there's some moving pieces now in this game. We

0:03:06.800 --> 0:03:09.600
<v Speaker 1>mentioned some of the injuries there, the return of DeAndre Hopkins,

0:03:10.160 --> 0:03:12.080
<v Speaker 1>but to me, it's the money lines, the plus one

0:03:12.160 --> 0:03:15.320
<v Speaker 1>twelve that really peaks my fancy here because I look

0:03:15.360 --> 0:03:17.400
<v Speaker 1>at that and I say there's opportunity. I think the

0:03:17.440 --> 0:03:20.280
<v Speaker 1>Saints are just a better team, a better roster, but

0:03:20.360 --> 0:03:23.040
<v Speaker 1>again still unknown a quarterback for them as well as

0:03:23.040 --> 0:03:24.280
<v Speaker 1>we head into the short week game.

0:03:25.080 --> 0:03:25.320
<v Speaker 4>Yeah.

0:03:25.360 --> 0:03:27.840
<v Speaker 5>So I have a couple of pieces on betting pros

0:03:28.000 --> 0:03:33.000
<v Speaker 5>that look at how money line underdogs do versus underdogs

0:03:33.000 --> 0:03:35.280
<v Speaker 5>against the spread, and historically at leads, like for the

0:03:35.280 --> 0:03:38.560
<v Speaker 5>past twenty years or so, if you've liked a team

0:03:39.000 --> 0:03:41.520
<v Speaker 5>an underdog on the spread, it's been a little more

0:03:41.520 --> 0:03:43.880
<v Speaker 5>profitable actually just to bet them on the money line.

0:03:44.080 --> 0:03:47.240
<v Speaker 5>So yeah, I think the instinct is right there. And

0:03:47.280 --> 0:03:49.520
<v Speaker 5>I'm very much on your side here, you know, fits

0:03:49.520 --> 0:03:51.720
<v Speaker 5>and I on the same side. So just kiss of death,

0:03:52.520 --> 0:03:56.600
<v Speaker 5>just guaranteed we're gonna lose, car Yeah, you know.

0:03:57.160 --> 0:03:57.560
<v Speaker 4>We lost.

0:03:57.680 --> 0:04:00.840
<v Speaker 5>We lost last Thursday night game, you know with the Bears,

0:04:00.840 --> 0:04:03.320
<v Speaker 5>and you know, but I do like the Saints on

0:04:03.360 --> 0:04:07.240
<v Speaker 5>this side here. Cliff Kingsbury is like a zigzag type

0:04:07.240 --> 0:04:12.040
<v Speaker 5>of coach where he's been historically very bad in particular situations.

0:04:12.160 --> 0:04:14.560
<v Speaker 5>Bad at home, bad is a favorite, and as a

0:04:14.560 --> 0:04:17.400
<v Speaker 5>home favorite four and eleven against the spread, like just

0:04:18.480 --> 0:04:21.400
<v Speaker 5>you know, just dunk on him anytime he's at home,

0:04:21.440 --> 0:04:23.599
<v Speaker 5>and Vegas is like, you know what, this guy should

0:04:23.640 --> 0:04:26.919
<v Speaker 5>be favored. So I am very much on the Saints

0:04:26.920 --> 0:04:28.480
<v Speaker 5>in the spot, I will say, though the line has

0:04:28.520 --> 0:04:31.479
<v Speaker 5>moved to I believe one and a half, you could

0:04:31.480 --> 0:04:33.440
<v Speaker 5>get it two and a half in the look ahead

0:04:33.480 --> 0:04:35.640
<v Speaker 5>and when it opened at one and a half, like

0:04:35.720 --> 0:04:36.440
<v Speaker 5>that kind of.

0:04:36.440 --> 0:04:37.800
<v Speaker 4>Is where I think it should be.

0:04:37.880 --> 0:04:40.320
<v Speaker 5>But if I'm still going to be betting on Thursday

0:04:40.360 --> 0:04:42.200
<v Speaker 5>night football and lots of people want to do that

0:04:42.920 --> 0:04:46.120
<v Speaker 5>because it's fun, I would be betting on the Saints.

0:04:46.160 --> 0:04:49.119
<v Speaker 5>That said, I feel like the real winners of Thursday

0:04:49.200 --> 0:04:52.200
<v Speaker 5>night Football have been everyone who hates Jeff Bezos, which

0:04:52.200 --> 0:04:54.440
<v Speaker 5>it feels like a lot of people. So the idea

0:04:54.480 --> 0:04:57.080
<v Speaker 5>of him paying billions of dollars to have Thursday night

0:04:57.160 --> 0:04:58.200
<v Speaker 5>football is funny.

0:04:58.640 --> 0:05:00.520
<v Speaker 4>And then the people who haven't watched the game shout

0:05:00.520 --> 0:05:00.800
<v Speaker 4>out me.

0:05:00.839 --> 0:05:03.160
<v Speaker 5>I haven't watched Thursday night Football in the past two Thursdays,

0:05:03.200 --> 0:05:04.599
<v Speaker 5>and I felt great about that.

0:05:04.680 --> 0:05:05.120
<v Speaker 4>Decision.

0:05:05.560 --> 0:05:07.640
<v Speaker 1>I gotta be honest with you. I watched about like

0:05:07.680 --> 0:05:10.520
<v Speaker 1>a quarter and a half of both and fell asleep,

0:05:10.680 --> 0:05:13.040
<v Speaker 1>and I definitely was better off for the sleep, I

0:05:13.040 --> 0:05:14.520
<v Speaker 1>can tell you that much. Yeah, back ahead.

0:05:14.760 --> 0:05:17.120
<v Speaker 2>People who work on Thursday nights are the real winners.

0:05:17.200 --> 0:05:21.320
<v Speaker 2>They're being productive and not watching these games. Kudos to them.

0:05:21.839 --> 0:05:25.040
<v Speaker 1>I will say that the crew that they have their reactions,

0:05:25.080 --> 0:05:27.159
<v Speaker 1>you know, if it's Patrick and Sherman, all those guys,

0:05:27.279 --> 0:05:29.559
<v Speaker 1>that has been entertaining. So I mean, maybe they should

0:05:29.600 --> 0:05:31.240
<v Speaker 1>just do like the Manning Cast where they let these

0:05:31.279 --> 0:05:33.960
<v Speaker 1>guys talk in real time and comment about the terrible

0:05:34.000 --> 0:05:36.919
<v Speaker 1>football going on. Now that's a broadcast I think everybody

0:05:36.920 --> 0:05:38.640
<v Speaker 1>could get into. Give them a couple of years and

0:05:38.640 --> 0:05:41.039
<v Speaker 1>see what really happens. Let's get to the next game.

0:05:41.440 --> 0:05:43.320
<v Speaker 4>Second one. I I lied.

0:05:43.400 --> 0:05:45.279
<v Speaker 5>I have this as a pick them, so I still

0:05:45.279 --> 0:05:47.279
<v Speaker 5>think there's there's value at this number here.

0:05:47.440 --> 0:05:48.840
<v Speaker 1>All right, Well, try not to lie to me the

0:05:48.880 --> 0:05:50.599
<v Speaker 1>rest of the show. All right, Let's go to the

0:05:50.600 --> 0:05:54.520
<v Speaker 1>next thing here Cleveland at Baltimore Hall, Baltimore. They are

0:05:54.600 --> 0:05:57.599
<v Speaker 1>letting teams back in every single game here and it

0:05:57.720 --> 0:06:00.320
<v Speaker 1>is not going well for the Baltimore Ravens. Not the

0:06:00.360 --> 0:06:02.840
<v Speaker 1>bleeding against the Cleveland Browns coming off of a butt

0:06:02.839 --> 0:06:06.039
<v Speaker 1>blubbing by the Patriots and their defense. The Cleveland Browns

0:06:06.040 --> 0:06:08.760
<v Speaker 1>are heading into Baltimore at six and a half point underdogs.

0:06:08.760 --> 0:06:10.360
<v Speaker 1>Forty six and a half is the number plus two

0:06:10.440 --> 0:06:14.000
<v Speaker 1>ten if you like the Cleveland Browns on the money line, Freedman, look,

0:06:14.640 --> 0:06:18.680
<v Speaker 1>Baltimore at home should always be a very strong investment. However,

0:06:18.800 --> 0:06:21.680
<v Speaker 1>they have struggled at home this year. They did get

0:06:21.720 --> 0:06:23.680
<v Speaker 1>right last game at home, but then they go on

0:06:23.720 --> 0:06:25.680
<v Speaker 1>the road to the Giants and lay another egg. So

0:06:26.080 --> 0:06:27.880
<v Speaker 1>what do you make of the Baltimore Ravens the six

0:06:27.920 --> 0:06:29.839
<v Speaker 1>and a half? Is there any way you feel comfortable

0:06:29.839 --> 0:06:30.440
<v Speaker 1>with this number?

0:06:30.960 --> 0:06:32.960
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, I would grab it before it gets to seven

0:06:33.560 --> 0:06:35.919
<v Speaker 5>because I think it's going in that direction. And it

0:06:36.040 --> 0:06:39.839
<v Speaker 5>was six earlier, so we are already moving in that way.

0:06:39.920 --> 0:06:42.160
<v Speaker 5>And you know, I'm a man of few beliefs, but

0:06:42.200 --> 0:06:44.159
<v Speaker 5>one of the things I do believe in is betting

0:06:44.200 --> 0:06:47.760
<v Speaker 5>against Kevin Stefanski in Division. He's two and eleven against

0:06:47.760 --> 0:06:51.240
<v Speaker 5>the spread in division, just absolutely horrible against teams who

0:06:51.320 --> 0:06:55.520
<v Speaker 5>know him, and zero to four against the spread against

0:06:55.560 --> 0:06:58.839
<v Speaker 5>the Ravens. Specifically, I don't have a lot of faith

0:06:58.839 --> 0:07:01.280
<v Speaker 5>in what's happening with their their offense.

0:07:01.960 --> 0:07:03.840
<v Speaker 4>So yeah, I'm going to be on the Ravens here.

0:07:04.720 --> 0:07:06.719
<v Speaker 1>Pat Are you a man of any beliefs when it

0:07:06.720 --> 0:07:07.479
<v Speaker 1>comes to this game?

0:07:07.880 --> 0:07:11.000
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I'm totally with Friedman. I was stunned when I

0:07:11.040 --> 0:07:13.280
<v Speaker 2>saw that this was under the key number of seven

0:07:13.320 --> 0:07:16.400
<v Speaker 2>and grabbed it immediately, like I have this as Ravens

0:07:16.400 --> 0:07:19.680
<v Speaker 2>seven and a half and the Ravens are one of

0:07:19.680 --> 0:07:22.720
<v Speaker 2>the teams as a better that I respect the most

0:07:22.880 --> 0:07:26.200
<v Speaker 2>in the NFL, and it's been really weird to see

0:07:26.240 --> 0:07:28.520
<v Speaker 2>them lose some of these games the way they have

0:07:28.600 --> 0:07:31.400
<v Speaker 2>and I'm licking my wounds after betting on them this

0:07:31.480 --> 0:07:35.920
<v Speaker 2>past week against the Giants. But like at home, their

0:07:36.000 --> 0:07:38.760
<v Speaker 2>home field advantage means more than some other home field

0:07:38.800 --> 0:07:43.040
<v Speaker 2>advantages in the NFL, without question, But like they're going

0:07:43.080 --> 0:07:47.000
<v Speaker 2>against a Cleveland Browns defense that's just completely broken. The

0:07:47.040 --> 0:07:49.760
<v Speaker 2>Browns gave up four hundred and forty rushing yards in

0:07:49.840 --> 0:07:55.040
<v Speaker 2>Week four and Week five combined. Then yesterday they sort

0:07:55.040 --> 0:07:58.800
<v Speaker 2>of get their running game run defense fixed. They did

0:07:58.840 --> 0:08:02.400
<v Speaker 2>give up three touchdown, but they generally held their own

0:08:02.400 --> 0:08:05.480
<v Speaker 2>against Romandre Stevenson and the Patriots. But they let Bailey

0:08:05.560 --> 0:08:08.320
<v Speaker 2>Zappi throw for over three hundred yards an average.

0:08:08.000 --> 0:08:10.760
<v Speaker 1>Over Nili Zappi disparaged on this program.

0:08:10.880 --> 0:08:13.440
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I mean a third stringer, and he averaged nine

0:08:13.480 --> 0:08:16.720
<v Speaker 2>point one yards per pass attempt against the Browns who

0:08:17.200 --> 0:08:20.040
<v Speaker 2>had just gotten Greedy Williams back at cornerback. So apparently

0:08:20.080 --> 0:08:23.960
<v Speaker 2>Greedy did not fix anything in the secondary.

0:08:24.000 --> 0:08:26.120
<v Speaker 3>This Browns defense is just terrible.

0:08:27.080 --> 0:08:29.160
<v Speaker 2>You know, the Ravens can hurt you in a lot

0:08:29.160 --> 0:08:31.040
<v Speaker 2>of different ways offensively, and I think they're going to

0:08:31.120 --> 0:08:34.199
<v Speaker 2>hurt the Browns badly in Baltimore next Sunday.

0:08:34.320 --> 0:08:36.720
<v Speaker 1>Big time. Bailey Zappi will talk about him a little

0:08:36.800 --> 0:08:40.960
<v Speaker 1>later in the show Monday Night Football, Let's Go Tampa Carolina.

0:08:41.120 --> 0:08:44.000
<v Speaker 1>Carolina did not circle the wagons. I was hoping they

0:08:44.040 --> 0:08:45.920
<v Speaker 1>would against the Rams. It was close there for a

0:08:45.920 --> 0:08:47.600
<v Speaker 1>little while, though. I know there's a lot of panic.

0:08:47.640 --> 0:08:50.120
<v Speaker 1>I could feel, could feel the tension in that building

0:08:50.160 --> 0:08:53.040
<v Speaker 1>in the first quarter, especially after that that interception for

0:08:53.120 --> 0:08:55.480
<v Speaker 1>the touchdown. Oh boy, that really felt like things were

0:08:55.480 --> 0:08:59.240
<v Speaker 1>starting to turn. But fortunately Carolina kind of unraveled here.

0:08:59.559 --> 0:09:02.600
<v Speaker 1>And speaking of unraveling, Tampa Bay Bucks did not take

0:09:02.640 --> 0:09:05.120
<v Speaker 1>care of business. All those injuries. Mika Fitzpatrick gout all

0:09:05.120 --> 0:09:07.800
<v Speaker 1>those things. They go out there to Pittsburgh and they

0:09:07.840 --> 0:09:10.240
<v Speaker 1>can't get it done. But despite all that on the road,

0:09:10.240 --> 0:09:12.400
<v Speaker 1>they're still ten point favorites in this game in week seven,

0:09:12.840 --> 0:09:16.440
<v Speaker 1>forty one is the number. Look pat when you're looking

0:09:16.440 --> 0:09:18.240
<v Speaker 1>here at Tampa. This is another team at three and

0:09:18.280 --> 0:09:20.600
<v Speaker 1>three that I think has really earned this five hundred record.

0:09:20.920 --> 0:09:23.560
<v Speaker 1>This feels like a smash. It's a double digit game.

0:09:23.920 --> 0:09:25.559
<v Speaker 1>Are we going to get the smash that we think?

0:09:27.120 --> 0:09:30.240
<v Speaker 2>I'm probably just laying off this one. Ten points feels

0:09:30.240 --> 0:09:33.080
<v Speaker 2>about right. Don't know what to make of the Panthers.

0:09:33.200 --> 0:09:35.920
<v Speaker 2>Maybe we get a Sam Darnold start next week, Like

0:09:35.960 --> 0:09:39.199
<v Speaker 2>Sam is due back pretty soon. I don't know what

0:09:39.240 --> 0:09:41.640
<v Speaker 2>that would do to this number, but it would certainly

0:09:41.679 --> 0:09:49.240
<v Speaker 2>make for some interesting subplots. Yeah, Tampa has been maybe

0:09:49.280 --> 0:09:53.080
<v Speaker 2>not quite as disappointing as the Packers, but they've sprung

0:09:53.080 --> 0:09:55.760
<v Speaker 2>a few leaks themselves, so I don't feel great betting

0:09:55.840 --> 0:10:00.520
<v Speaker 2>them as a double digits road favorites. But I can't

0:10:00.520 --> 0:10:02.880
<v Speaker 2>bet the Panthers either, so I'm probably just gonna walk

0:10:02.920 --> 0:10:03.839
<v Speaker 2>away from this game.

0:10:04.520 --> 0:10:07.720
<v Speaker 1>Panthers fans feel like the kid who gets the crappy

0:10:07.800 --> 0:10:10.280
<v Speaker 1>toy every time they go to McDonald's and the Happy Meal.

0:10:10.320 --> 0:10:12.200
<v Speaker 1>No matter what happens, they just look in that box.

0:10:12.240 --> 0:10:15.240
<v Speaker 1>And like Sam Darnald, Baker, Mayfield, p J. Walker, doesn't

0:10:15.280 --> 0:10:18.320
<v Speaker 1>matter where everything's just going bad. Matthew Friedman, what do

0:10:18.360 --> 0:10:20.240
<v Speaker 1>you look at in the box when you look at

0:10:20.240 --> 0:10:20.680
<v Speaker 1>this game?

0:10:21.679 --> 0:10:23.600
<v Speaker 5>I feel if you're going to take a side, it's

0:10:23.640 --> 0:10:26.840
<v Speaker 5>Panthers or nothing. I feel like maybe only two teams,

0:10:26.880 --> 0:10:29.800
<v Speaker 5>maybe three teams in the NFL should have the luxury

0:10:29.840 --> 0:10:33.480
<v Speaker 5>of being double digit favorites, you know, like the Bills,

0:10:33.920 --> 0:10:37.480
<v Speaker 5>the Chiefs, maybe the Eagles, but definitely not the Bucks,

0:10:37.520 --> 0:10:39.480
<v Speaker 5>even if they're going against the worst team in the league.

0:10:39.480 --> 0:10:41.880
<v Speaker 5>But I do think the Panthers are the worst team

0:10:41.920 --> 0:10:44.400
<v Speaker 5>in the league. There's still divisional opponents, so you know

0:10:44.480 --> 0:10:48.120
<v Speaker 5>that adds a layer here, and ten points is just

0:10:48.240 --> 0:10:48.600
<v Speaker 5>so much.

0:10:48.679 --> 0:10:50.719
<v Speaker 4>The thing is, we don't even know who the.

0:10:50.720 --> 0:10:52.920
<v Speaker 5>Quarterback is going to be for the Panthers, and I

0:10:52.920 --> 0:10:55.560
<v Speaker 5>don't know if that even impacts the line at all

0:10:55.960 --> 0:10:58.320
<v Speaker 5>with how bad all of these guys have played.

0:10:58.360 --> 0:10:59.839
<v Speaker 4>But I have this at eight and a half.

0:11:00.000 --> 0:11:02.080
<v Speaker 5>So that said, like I really don't want to bet

0:11:02.120 --> 0:11:04.920
<v Speaker 5>on the Panthers, So like I'm not gonna take it.

0:11:05.120 --> 0:11:07.640
<v Speaker 5>I did bet the under under forty one. I think

0:11:07.679 --> 0:11:12.160
<v Speaker 5>that's where there's value here because the Buccaneers they are

0:11:12.200 --> 0:11:15.559
<v Speaker 5>not fully functional even close to it on offense. They

0:11:15.600 --> 0:11:18.640
<v Speaker 5>do have a very good defense. And again for Panthers,

0:11:18.640 --> 0:11:20.240
<v Speaker 5>we don't know who their quarterback is going to be,

0:11:20.280 --> 0:11:22.320
<v Speaker 5>but whoever it is, he's not gonna be helping them

0:11:22.360 --> 0:11:25.160
<v Speaker 5>score a lot of points. So forty one feels like

0:11:25.240 --> 0:11:28.480
<v Speaker 5>a pretty high number for two teams that are really

0:11:28.600 --> 0:11:30.160
<v Speaker 5>underpeak capacity right now.

0:11:30.679 --> 0:11:32.560
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I think that's a really good piece of advice

0:11:32.640 --> 0:11:34.480
<v Speaker 1>right now, so look at the under. Another good piece

0:11:34.480 --> 0:11:36.720
<v Speaker 1>of advice here is to go have some more fun

0:11:36.760 --> 0:11:38.839
<v Speaker 1>over at Sleeper because they've got that over under game

0:11:38.880 --> 0:11:40.720
<v Speaker 1>that's going on right now, and you can invite your

0:11:40.720 --> 0:11:43.320
<v Speaker 1>friends and play against them. And chances are you're playing

0:11:43.360 --> 0:11:45.360
<v Speaker 1>some leagues on sleep already, So if you haven't already,

0:11:45.480 --> 0:11:48.320
<v Speaker 1>check out the over under game right now. You can

0:11:48.440 --> 0:11:50.560
<v Speaker 1>choose two or more players from any sport you like,

0:11:50.960 --> 0:11:53.079
<v Speaker 1>and you can go like rushing yards in a football game.

0:11:53.120 --> 0:11:54.839
<v Speaker 1>You can go points in a basketball game. You can

0:11:54.880 --> 0:11:57.160
<v Speaker 1>do baseball stuff too. There's all kinds of things you

0:11:57.200 --> 0:11:58.959
<v Speaker 1>can do. Then you choose the amount of money you

0:11:59.000 --> 0:12:01.120
<v Speaker 1>want to enter the contest, and if you pick correctly,

0:12:01.320 --> 0:12:04.120
<v Speaker 1>you can win anywhere from two to twenty times your money.

0:12:04.440 --> 0:12:06.360
<v Speaker 1>And it's fun because you can go get involved with

0:12:06.440 --> 0:12:08.280
<v Speaker 1>your friends and send them contests and go ahead and

0:12:08.280 --> 0:12:10.440
<v Speaker 1>build all that together. But you can only do it

0:12:10.720 --> 0:12:13.880
<v Speaker 1>over at Sleeper Dot app slash Betting Pros. Again, that's

0:12:14.000 --> 0:12:17.040
<v Speaker 1>Sleeper Dot app slash Betting Pros and use that promo

0:12:17.040 --> 0:12:19.480
<v Speaker 1>code Betting Pros when you sign up, because when you do,

0:12:19.760 --> 0:12:23.000
<v Speaker 1>you'll get the instant deposit match up to one hundred dollars. Again,

0:12:23.080 --> 0:12:25.959
<v Speaker 1>you can download the Sleeper app. It's everywhere. It's easy

0:12:26.000 --> 0:12:28.440
<v Speaker 1>to get and go to Sleeper Dot app slash Betting Pros.

0:12:28.520 --> 0:12:30.440
<v Speaker 1>Use a promo code Betting Pros when you sign up

0:12:30.480 --> 0:12:32.320
<v Speaker 1>today and go play some over under have some fun.

0:12:32.600 --> 0:12:33.960
<v Speaker 1>Let's see if we can have some fun with this

0:12:34.040 --> 0:12:36.559
<v Speaker 1>next game on the slate here, because it's the Atlanta Falcons,

0:12:37.720 --> 0:12:41.160
<v Speaker 1>the David to the Goliath out there. Some of these

0:12:41.160 --> 0:12:43.920
<v Speaker 1>teams of the NFL, who'd have thought the Atlanta Falcons

0:12:43.960 --> 0:12:46.960
<v Speaker 1>they are still six point hundred dogs. Ooh. Going into Cincinnati,

0:12:46.960 --> 0:12:50.199
<v Speaker 1>Cincinnati is starting to write the ship a little bit.

0:12:50.200 --> 0:12:53.280
<v Speaker 1>It feels like in recent weeks, after a really rough

0:12:53.280 --> 0:12:56.320
<v Speaker 1>start to the season, they are six point favorites at home.

0:12:56.360 --> 0:12:58.640
<v Speaker 1>The numbers forty five and a half. If you like

0:12:58.640 --> 0:13:00.760
<v Speaker 1>the Falcons to upset, it's US two twenty on the

0:13:00.800 --> 0:13:03.640
<v Speaker 1>money line. Now, Matthew Friedman, when you're looking at this one,

0:13:03.679 --> 0:13:05.760
<v Speaker 1>does this feel like maybe this is actually not a

0:13:05.800 --> 0:13:08.840
<v Speaker 1>big enough number considering how the Bengals have started to

0:13:08.840 --> 0:13:11.240
<v Speaker 1>turn things around, or do you think the Falcons have

0:13:11.360 --> 0:13:13.079
<v Speaker 1>earned the respect here of the six.

0:13:13.960 --> 0:13:19.200
<v Speaker 5>I'm actually impressed with the Falcons, and there is still

0:13:19.200 --> 0:13:21.520
<v Speaker 5>a six and a half out there at FanDuel. I'm

0:13:21.520 --> 0:13:24.120
<v Speaker 5>a little bit angry at myself because you know, Fitz

0:13:24.160 --> 0:13:28.600
<v Speaker 5>and I we project these games before before Sunday, and

0:13:28.679 --> 0:13:32.000
<v Speaker 5>so we already have our preliminary projections, and you know,

0:13:32.040 --> 0:13:33.680
<v Speaker 5>we can compare them to the look ahead line, and

0:13:33.679 --> 0:13:36.160
<v Speaker 5>the look ahead on this was seven, and I had

0:13:36.160 --> 0:13:38.720
<v Speaker 5>this at five point seven five, and like, you know,

0:13:38.760 --> 0:13:41.920
<v Speaker 5>one point two five points difference. That's not a massive difference,

0:13:41.920 --> 0:13:45.040
<v Speaker 5>but when the number is on seven, that's pretty significant.

0:13:45.040 --> 0:13:46.520
<v Speaker 5>And I wish I would have just bet it then,

0:13:46.520 --> 0:13:48.680
<v Speaker 5>because I still have it at five point seven to five.

0:13:49.640 --> 0:13:51.679
<v Speaker 5>You know, the early line was six and a half.

0:13:51.760 --> 0:13:54.480
<v Speaker 5>Now it's six at most books. I should have just

0:13:54.480 --> 0:13:57.640
<v Speaker 5>bet it earlier. But given that it's at six now

0:13:57.880 --> 0:13:59.679
<v Speaker 5>and I have it at five point seven five, I

0:13:59.760 --> 0:14:01.200
<v Speaker 5>really don't see any value.

0:14:01.760 --> 0:14:03.400
<v Speaker 1>Pat how about you d see any value or you

0:14:03.520 --> 0:14:04.400
<v Speaker 1>kind of where Friedman is?

0:14:04.640 --> 0:14:06.760
<v Speaker 2>No, I'm kind of where Friedman is. And Friedman mentioned

0:14:06.800 --> 0:14:11.480
<v Speaker 2>that we do the early projections like before the previous week's.

0:14:11.200 --> 0:14:12.720
<v Speaker 3>Games are played, and.

0:14:14.040 --> 0:14:15.679
<v Speaker 2>This week I had a few games where I was

0:14:15.720 --> 0:14:18.480
<v Speaker 2>pretty much right with where the numbers wound up being,

0:14:18.520 --> 0:14:21.400
<v Speaker 2>and that was one of the cases here. I had

0:14:22.240 --> 0:14:24.200
<v Speaker 2>the Bengals as a six and a half point favorite

0:14:24.240 --> 0:14:27.000
<v Speaker 2>and a forty five point total, So I'm with Friedman

0:14:27.080 --> 0:14:29.920
<v Speaker 2>like if I had seen it, I didn't even notice

0:14:29.960 --> 0:14:32.520
<v Speaker 2>that seven point number. Like if I could have gotten

0:14:32.520 --> 0:14:33.960
<v Speaker 2>it on that key number, I would have loved the

0:14:33.960 --> 0:14:34.640
<v Speaker 2>Falcons here.

0:14:34.680 --> 0:14:37.080
<v Speaker 3>But at six and a half, it just feels right.

0:14:38.040 --> 0:14:40.040
<v Speaker 2>The Bengals, I think their fans would tell you, they

0:14:40.640 --> 0:14:42.840
<v Speaker 2>have played down to the level of their opponents a

0:14:42.880 --> 0:14:46.040
<v Speaker 2>little bit this season, so it worries me to have

0:14:46.160 --> 0:14:49.280
<v Speaker 2>them covering kind of a large number against a team

0:14:49.320 --> 0:14:51.840
<v Speaker 2>that's been as plucky as the Falcons have been this season.

0:14:52.960 --> 0:14:55.760
<v Speaker 2>I'm definitely not taking Cincinnati. If you pressed me on

0:14:55.760 --> 0:14:58.120
<v Speaker 2>this one, I'd play Atlanta, But I'm probably not going

0:14:58.200 --> 0:15:00.040
<v Speaker 2>to bet this. It stays at six and n and

0:15:00.040 --> 0:15:03.840
<v Speaker 2>a half or goes to six. As Friedman mentioned, it has.

0:15:03.960 --> 0:15:06.200
<v Speaker 1>Cooper Rush has taken the Dallas Cowboys about as far

0:15:06.200 --> 0:15:07.960
<v Speaker 1>as he could probably and it was a heck of

0:15:08.000 --> 0:15:10.240
<v Speaker 1>an effort, but they came up short against the Eagles.

0:15:10.240 --> 0:15:13.520
<v Speaker 1>It looks like Dak Prescott is targeting a return this week.

0:15:13.560 --> 0:15:16.600
<v Speaker 1>In Week seven, the Cowboys stand at four and two.

0:15:16.640 --> 0:15:19.240
<v Speaker 1>They are at home seven point favorites against the Lions,

0:15:19.240 --> 0:15:21.800
<v Speaker 1>were coming off a bye, looking their wounds were getting

0:15:21.840 --> 0:15:24.760
<v Speaker 1>shut out. They should be getting healthy two. I'man Ross

0:15:24.840 --> 0:15:27.600
<v Speaker 1>and Brown another healthy week ahead of him, hopefully DeAndre

0:15:27.760 --> 0:15:30.920
<v Speaker 1>Swift as well. So this number is forty seven and

0:15:30.920 --> 0:15:32.640
<v Speaker 1>a half. It's plus two forty on the money line

0:15:32.680 --> 0:15:36.320
<v Speaker 1>if you like the Lions. But Pat, I imagine this

0:15:36.400 --> 0:15:40.000
<v Speaker 1>is a good opportunity here for Dak Prescott against a

0:15:40.040 --> 0:15:42.160
<v Speaker 1>pretty weak defense, to go ahead and put some numbers

0:15:42.160 --> 0:15:44.000
<v Speaker 1>on the board. Is that forty seven and a half

0:15:44.240 --> 0:15:46.280
<v Speaker 1>an over in your opinion? And should you bet it now?

0:15:46.760 --> 0:15:46.840
<v Speaker 3>No?

0:15:47.000 --> 0:15:49.080
<v Speaker 2>I actually like the under here, Joe, and I like

0:15:49.160 --> 0:15:52.800
<v Speaker 2>that more than either side of this game. I just

0:15:52.840 --> 0:15:55.760
<v Speaker 2>think Dak maybe having a little bit of rost, and

0:15:56.080 --> 0:15:59.320
<v Speaker 2>maybe the Lions fix some things on defense during their

0:15:59.320 --> 0:15:59.800
<v Speaker 2>bye week.

0:16:00.080 --> 0:16:00.880
<v Speaker 3>I don't know about that.

0:16:00.960 --> 0:16:05.480
<v Speaker 2>But and then you know, this Detroit offense going up

0:16:05.520 --> 0:16:09.160
<v Speaker 2>against Dallas. The Dallas defense has been so impressive this season,

0:16:10.080 --> 0:16:12.480
<v Speaker 2>you know, Like I know, the Eagles move the ball

0:16:13.120 --> 0:16:16.400
<v Speaker 2>fairly effectively for much of the Sunday night game this

0:16:16.440 --> 0:16:19.120
<v Speaker 2>past week, but they were not exactly going up and

0:16:19.160 --> 0:16:21.360
<v Speaker 2>down the field on Dallas, like this is one of

0:16:21.360 --> 0:16:25.360
<v Speaker 2>the better we all for sure. So I think it's

0:16:25.400 --> 0:16:30.240
<v Speaker 2>gonna I'm I'm not liking the over here very much

0:16:30.320 --> 0:16:32.480
<v Speaker 2>at all, and I'm inclined to go the other.

0:16:32.360 --> 0:16:32.880
<v Speaker 3>Way on it.

0:16:33.720 --> 0:16:35.680
<v Speaker 1>All right, how about you, Freedman, you're looking at this,

0:16:35.760 --> 0:16:38.320
<v Speaker 1>do you think it is all doom and gloom and

0:16:38.400 --> 0:16:40.640
<v Speaker 1>low scoring here is Pat's kind of alluding to. Or

0:16:40.640 --> 0:16:43.040
<v Speaker 1>do you think maybe the defense creates some turnovers and

0:16:43.160 --> 0:16:44.920
<v Speaker 1>Detroit doesn't have to do all that much to help

0:16:44.960 --> 0:16:45.480
<v Speaker 1>this over go.

0:16:46.920 --> 0:16:49.880
<v Speaker 5>I'm on Detroit in this spot, and so that you know,

0:16:50.000 --> 0:16:52.520
<v Speaker 5>leans a little bit more towards the under you know,

0:16:52.600 --> 0:16:55.080
<v Speaker 5>because I could see a game where Dak Prescott does

0:16:55.120 --> 0:16:57.520
<v Speaker 5>return but is a little bit rusty. I'm expecting him

0:16:57.520 --> 0:17:00.360
<v Speaker 5>to return this week, and that was already baked into, believe,

0:17:00.360 --> 0:17:02.560
<v Speaker 5>baked into the line ahead of time and the look

0:17:02.600 --> 0:17:05.679
<v Speaker 5>ahead this was minus seven, and I thought, okay, like

0:17:05.720 --> 0:17:07.680
<v Speaker 5>that means Dak is coming back, And.

0:17:07.600 --> 0:17:09.280
<v Speaker 4>The early line released was seven.

0:17:09.440 --> 0:17:12.359
<v Speaker 5>It hasn't moved at all, even though there's enthusiasm that

0:17:12.440 --> 0:17:15.320
<v Speaker 5>Dak is coming back. So I think that was all

0:17:15.440 --> 0:17:18.000
<v Speaker 5>very much baked into the line here, and that feels

0:17:18.080 --> 0:17:22.560
<v Speaker 5>pretty aggressive for a quarterback who has a thumb injury.

0:17:23.960 --> 0:17:28.720
<v Speaker 5>His offensive line still isn't all that great. The offense.

0:17:28.760 --> 0:17:31.720
<v Speaker 5>I know like they've been playing in such a way

0:17:31.800 --> 0:17:34.280
<v Speaker 5>to kind of shield Cooper rush, but I still don't

0:17:34.320 --> 0:17:37.480
<v Speaker 5>know if that offense is going to be as functional

0:17:37.600 --> 0:17:41.240
<v Speaker 5>as people think it might be when Dak returns. So

0:17:41.920 --> 0:17:44.600
<v Speaker 5>seven feels like a lot to me. I have this

0:17:44.720 --> 0:17:47.320
<v Speaker 5>at five and a half. And maybe I'm too low

0:17:47.960 --> 0:17:50.679
<v Speaker 5>on the Cowboys. Like the thing is, I still have

0:17:50.680 --> 0:17:52.640
<v Speaker 5>them power rated as the number four team right now,

0:17:52.760 --> 0:17:54.560
<v Speaker 5>so I feel like I'm giving them quite a bit

0:17:54.560 --> 0:17:55.160
<v Speaker 5>of respect.

0:17:55.640 --> 0:17:57.199
<v Speaker 4>But I don't know.

0:17:57.280 --> 0:18:00.639
<v Speaker 5>Maybe I'm overwaiting to buy. But Detroit coming off of

0:18:00.640 --> 0:18:02.879
<v Speaker 5>the buy. I think they should be very close to

0:18:02.920 --> 0:18:05.600
<v Speaker 5>fully healthy with a mon Ross Saint Brown coming back,

0:18:05.640 --> 0:18:08.040
<v Speaker 5>DeAndre Swift coming back. They've had two weeks to plan

0:18:08.119 --> 0:18:08.800
<v Speaker 5>for this game.

0:18:09.840 --> 0:18:12.919
<v Speaker 4>I don't know. I think Detroit is undervalued in this spot.

0:18:13.400 --> 0:18:15.040
<v Speaker 1>All right, let's see if we can find any value

0:18:15.080 --> 0:18:18.600
<v Speaker 1>with the New York Football Giants, who are five and one. No,

0:18:18.760 --> 0:18:21.600
<v Speaker 1>you heard me right, five and one New York Football

0:18:21.640 --> 0:18:24.720
<v Speaker 1>Giants against the Jacksonville Jaguars are two and four. The

0:18:24.880 --> 0:18:28.560
<v Speaker 1>Jacksonville Jaguars, though still at home, three point favorites regardless

0:18:28.560 --> 0:18:30.200
<v Speaker 1>of record of these two teams. Forty two and a

0:18:30.240 --> 0:18:32.280
<v Speaker 1>half is the number if you like the Giants to continue.

0:18:32.320 --> 0:18:34.720
<v Speaker 1>They're winning ways. Unto Brian Dable, well you can get

0:18:34.720 --> 0:18:37.520
<v Speaker 1>it at plus one eighteen. Matthew Friedman, when you're taking

0:18:37.560 --> 0:18:39.080
<v Speaker 1>a look at this one, I know it's hard to

0:18:39.119 --> 0:18:42.440
<v Speaker 1>believe in the Giants, But do you believe in the Giants?

0:18:43.000 --> 0:18:43.600
<v Speaker 4>Let me see.

0:18:44.080 --> 0:18:47.960
<v Speaker 5>I want to make sure I actually see what No,

0:18:48.080 --> 0:18:50.680
<v Speaker 5>because I like I wrote them up like I'm on

0:18:50.720 --> 0:18:53.200
<v Speaker 5>this game. I'm just not sure if I actually entered

0:18:53.400 --> 0:18:56.400
<v Speaker 5>this bet into our tracker, but I bet it. I'm

0:18:56.440 --> 0:18:59.480
<v Speaker 5>on the Giants. In this spot, like one on the Giants.

0:19:00.160 --> 0:19:02.280
<v Speaker 5>L Jones is twelve and four is a road underdog.

0:19:02.480 --> 0:19:05.800
<v Speaker 5>I've actually been like, I haven't been impressed with what

0:19:05.840 --> 0:19:08.639
<v Speaker 5>they are doing on a play to play basis, but

0:19:08.720 --> 0:19:11.439
<v Speaker 5>I'm impressed with the way that they like keep games

0:19:11.480 --> 0:19:13.760
<v Speaker 5>close and then pull it out at the end. And

0:19:14.680 --> 0:19:17.679
<v Speaker 5>the Jags like they're fine. They're not as good as

0:19:17.720 --> 0:19:20.040
<v Speaker 5>they looked the first couple of games, but I don't

0:19:20.040 --> 0:19:22.480
<v Speaker 5>think that they should be favored in this spot, Like,

0:19:22.760 --> 0:19:25.480
<v Speaker 5>I think the Giants are the better team, and I

0:19:25.520 --> 0:19:27.640
<v Speaker 5>don't think the Jags have as much of a home

0:19:27.680 --> 0:19:30.760
<v Speaker 5>field advantage as we might think based on the three

0:19:30.800 --> 0:19:31.800
<v Speaker 5>points that they're getting.

0:19:32.600 --> 0:19:34.320
<v Speaker 1>I'll take it a step further. I think the Jags

0:19:34.320 --> 0:19:37.320
<v Speaker 1>are the more talented roster on paper. Yeah, but I

0:19:37.320 --> 0:19:39.680
<v Speaker 1>don't think they play better football than the New York

0:19:39.680 --> 0:19:41.880
<v Speaker 1>Giants are playing right now in terms of effort level

0:19:42.080 --> 0:19:44.240
<v Speaker 1>at times on both sides of the football. I think

0:19:44.280 --> 0:19:48.399
<v Speaker 1>that's kind of where I kind of where Friedman is,

0:19:48.400 --> 0:19:50.879
<v Speaker 1>where I'm leading towards the Giants here, Pat, are you

0:19:50.960 --> 0:19:52.720
<v Speaker 1>also on that train where you're looking at what the

0:19:52.760 --> 0:19:55.840
<v Speaker 1>Giants have done so far? It doesn't make sense necessarily

0:19:55.840 --> 0:19:57.960
<v Speaker 1>when you see the players that they're running out there,

0:19:58.240 --> 0:20:02.040
<v Speaker 1>but the level of I would say effort that they're

0:20:02.080 --> 0:20:05.240
<v Speaker 1>giving is there, and they're keeping these games close. And

0:20:05.280 --> 0:20:06.919
<v Speaker 1>when you win these close games in the NFL, it

0:20:07.000 --> 0:20:10.480
<v Speaker 1>tends to become something that carries over with confidence and

0:20:10.520 --> 0:20:12.239
<v Speaker 1>you start to believe that you're going to win all

0:20:12.280 --> 0:20:14.760
<v Speaker 1>these close games and that's a huge mental advantage.

0:20:15.160 --> 0:20:18.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, this defense is actually pretty good, and I think

0:20:18.040 --> 0:20:21.040
<v Speaker 2>it's one of the more underrated defenses in the league.

0:20:21.119 --> 0:20:25.680
<v Speaker 2>And when you know they get disease Ogulari back, they're

0:20:25.680 --> 0:20:28.639
<v Speaker 2>going to have him and Leonard Williams and Keveon Thibodau upfront,

0:20:28.680 --> 0:20:30.240
<v Speaker 2>and that is pretty nasty.

0:20:30.840 --> 0:20:32.159
<v Speaker 3>That's going to be a lot to contend with.

0:20:32.760 --> 0:20:38.720
<v Speaker 2>And you mentioned it, Joe, like Daniel Jones, like he well,

0:20:38.760 --> 0:20:40.880
<v Speaker 2>he's not giving the ball away. I mean he used

0:20:40.920 --> 0:20:44.280
<v Speaker 2>to be reliable, Yeah right, he used to be reliable

0:20:44.359 --> 0:20:47.679
<v Speaker 2>for like one or two just mind numbingly stupid turnovers

0:20:47.720 --> 0:20:49.840
<v Speaker 2>in the past and he has not done that and

0:20:49.880 --> 0:20:52.960
<v Speaker 2>that has helped the Giants stay in these close games.

0:20:53.040 --> 0:20:57.480
<v Speaker 2>So yeah, like, I'm not rushing to bat this one,

0:20:57.560 --> 0:20:58.920
<v Speaker 2>but if I were going to bet it, it would

0:20:58.960 --> 0:20:59.960
<v Speaker 2>definitely be the Giant.

0:21:00.640 --> 0:21:04.280
<v Speaker 5>Here's one thing to add into this, though, I slash

0:21:04.359 --> 0:21:06.959
<v Speaker 5>we might be wrong on this, just based on the

0:21:07.000 --> 0:21:08.080
<v Speaker 5>early line movement.

0:21:08.920 --> 0:21:10.840
<v Speaker 4>You know, it was two two and a half.

0:21:10.880 --> 0:21:12.719
<v Speaker 5>It has moved to three at some books, So it

0:21:12.800 --> 0:21:16.320
<v Speaker 5>is moving against us towards the Jaguars, which I just

0:21:16.400 --> 0:21:17.320
<v Speaker 5>I think that's wrong.

0:21:17.600 --> 0:21:20.040
<v Speaker 4>But I don't know. Maybe it's people just being skeptical

0:21:20.040 --> 0:21:20.800
<v Speaker 4>of the Giants.

0:21:21.240 --> 0:21:22.960
<v Speaker 1>I think they're being skeptical to the Giants because I

0:21:22.960 --> 0:21:24.959
<v Speaker 1>think you look at the roster and you look at

0:21:25.000 --> 0:21:27.159
<v Speaker 1>the comparison, and you see the same thing I just

0:21:27.240 --> 0:21:30.120
<v Speaker 1>laid out, which is there's more talent, there's more offensive

0:21:30.160 --> 0:21:33.480
<v Speaker 1>explosiveness beside Saquon Barkley. It's hard to get excited about

0:21:33.520 --> 0:21:36.200
<v Speaker 1>the Giants offense. Let's be honest. But as long as

0:21:36.240 --> 0:21:38.680
<v Speaker 1>Barkley run the ball and play defense, right at the

0:21:38.760 --> 0:21:42.000
<v Speaker 1>end of the day, that simple formula football still works

0:21:42.000 --> 0:21:43.919
<v Speaker 1>in the regular season. It doesn't work necessarily in the

0:21:43.920 --> 0:21:46.840
<v Speaker 1>playoffs nowadays in this version of the NFL. But regular season,

0:21:47.520 --> 0:21:51.000
<v Speaker 1>that stuff travels, you know, especially that travels defense and

0:21:51.040 --> 0:21:53.119
<v Speaker 1>run the football. Let's go to the Colts. Three to

0:21:53.119 --> 0:21:55.320
<v Speaker 1>two one. That's the record for the Colts. They are

0:21:55.359 --> 0:21:58.720
<v Speaker 1>two and a half point underdogs heading to Tennessee or

0:21:58.720 --> 0:22:01.720
<v Speaker 1>another rematch. Last time these two teams met, Tennessee got

0:22:01.720 --> 0:22:04.439
<v Speaker 1>the better of Indianapolis in their building. Now we're going

0:22:04.520 --> 0:22:06.560
<v Speaker 1>to see if they can repay the favor. Forty two

0:22:06.600 --> 0:22:08.320
<v Speaker 1>and a half is the number if you like the

0:22:08.320 --> 0:22:10.880
<v Speaker 1>Colts on the money line plus one twenty two. So

0:22:10.920 --> 0:22:13.439
<v Speaker 1>Matt Ryan and the Colts kind of pulled themselves up

0:22:13.440 --> 0:22:16.479
<v Speaker 1>by the Haunches with Dion Jackson, no Jonathan Taylor. They

0:22:16.480 --> 0:22:19.120
<v Speaker 1>got a w against Jacksonville. Does that momentum gary over

0:22:19.160 --> 0:22:21.880
<v Speaker 1>here at all for you? Pat Fitzmorris in this game

0:22:21.960 --> 0:22:23.680
<v Speaker 1>against the Tennessee Titans.

0:22:23.520 --> 0:22:25.720
<v Speaker 2>Oh, man, I feel like you should just skip me, Joe,

0:22:25.840 --> 0:22:28.080
<v Speaker 2>Like I cannot get on the right side of the

0:22:28.119 --> 0:22:30.440
<v Speaker 2>Colts this year. Like I have no read on what's

0:22:30.440 --> 0:22:31.080
<v Speaker 2>going over here.

0:22:31.160 --> 0:22:33.800
<v Speaker 1>Everybody has that one team. I could see that the

0:22:33.840 --> 0:22:35.280
<v Speaker 1>Colts being that for a lot of people.

0:22:35.520 --> 0:22:36.160
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I bet.

0:22:36.200 --> 0:22:39.280
<v Speaker 2>I bet the Jaguars hard against them yesterday and you know,

0:22:39.440 --> 0:22:42.160
<v Speaker 2>got it handed to me. I figured they'd really struggle

0:22:42.200 --> 0:22:46.320
<v Speaker 2>without Jonathan Taylor, without Nahem Hines and more importantly without

0:22:46.840 --> 0:22:51.480
<v Speaker 2>Shaq Leonard and who else were they missing on defense?

0:22:51.520 --> 0:22:53.480
<v Speaker 3>There was some other key oh quitty patty.

0:22:53.760 --> 0:22:57.080
<v Speaker 2>Yeah yeah, So man, I just like I thought they

0:22:57.080 --> 0:23:01.600
<v Speaker 2>would have a really hard time yesterday and they were scrappy.

0:23:01.800 --> 0:23:05.680
<v Speaker 3>Like the passing game has not worked for them the past.

0:23:05.760 --> 0:23:09.320
<v Speaker 2>Blocking has been terrible, the offensive line's been like shockingly bad.

0:23:09.880 --> 0:23:13.600
<v Speaker 2>And you know, they somehow managed to run like what

0:23:13.760 --> 0:23:17.119
<v Speaker 2>seventy four offensive plays yesterday and keep the ball in

0:23:17.119 --> 0:23:18.800
<v Speaker 2>their hands pretty much the entire game.

0:23:18.840 --> 0:23:20.520
<v Speaker 3>It was a really weird game. Script.

0:23:20.760 --> 0:23:25.119
<v Speaker 2>I just like nothing the Colts does is kind of

0:23:25.160 --> 0:23:27.160
<v Speaker 2>the way I think it's going to be this year.

0:23:27.320 --> 0:23:29.480
<v Speaker 2>Like they've just sort of surprised me at every turn.

0:23:29.560 --> 0:23:31.520
<v Speaker 2>So I just like, I don't want to touch any

0:23:31.520 --> 0:23:33.080
<v Speaker 2>game involving Indianapolis.

0:23:33.480 --> 0:23:35.320
<v Speaker 1>All right, So free event, should we go full George

0:23:35.320 --> 0:23:37.879
<v Speaker 1>Castanza here and just go against every good instinct we

0:23:38.000 --> 0:23:41.120
<v Speaker 1>have and whatever we think the Colts will be doing,

0:23:41.119 --> 0:23:42.680
<v Speaker 1>we should just bet the opposite here.

0:23:43.280 --> 0:23:43.880
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, don't.

0:23:44.119 --> 0:23:45.879
<v Speaker 5>I don't know with the Colts. I mean, I have

0:23:45.960 --> 0:23:48.280
<v Speaker 5>this at one point seventy five, so in theory there's

0:23:48.359 --> 0:23:50.359
<v Speaker 5>a little bit of value, but not really like the

0:23:50.400 --> 0:23:52.280
<v Speaker 5>difference between that and the two to two and a

0:23:52.320 --> 0:23:54.359
<v Speaker 5>half we see in the market as negligible, but I

0:23:54.400 --> 0:23:56.400
<v Speaker 5>do think there's value on the under. You know, we've

0:23:56.440 --> 0:23:59.479
<v Speaker 5>got two divisional opponents the numbers forty two, forty two

0:23:59.520 --> 0:24:02.760
<v Speaker 5>and a half. We got two divisional opponents who like

0:24:02.840 --> 0:24:06.679
<v Speaker 5>to run the ball, and I don't know, I just

0:24:07.000 --> 0:24:11.080
<v Speaker 5>neither offense is very good. So this just neither defense

0:24:11.160 --> 0:24:13.280
<v Speaker 5>is all that great either. But I think with the

0:24:13.359 --> 0:24:15.440
<v Speaker 5>divisional opponents who know each other and have a run

0:24:15.440 --> 0:24:17.560
<v Speaker 5>heavy offensive focus.

0:24:17.720 --> 0:24:20.440
<v Speaker 4>Forty two is just a little too high.

0:24:21.280 --> 0:24:23.920
<v Speaker 1>Now, if you watched or listened to last week's show,

0:24:24.840 --> 0:24:28.520
<v Speaker 1>you know that I was picking on the Green Bay

0:24:28.520 --> 0:24:31.040
<v Speaker 1>Packers a bit and talking about the New York Jets

0:24:31.040 --> 0:24:33.160
<v Speaker 1>and that number and all that stuff. Now they went

0:24:33.160 --> 0:24:34.919
<v Speaker 1>out and won outright, But if ever there was a

0:24:34.960 --> 0:24:37.920
<v Speaker 1>game here for the Packers to maybe get this this

0:24:38.080 --> 0:24:42.040
<v Speaker 1>air attack of theirs, right, it's the Washington secondary. You

0:24:42.040 --> 0:24:44.560
<v Speaker 1>would imagine this is an opportunity for Aaron Rodgers to

0:24:44.600 --> 0:24:47.679
<v Speaker 1>start throwing the football comfortably again. Especially we have an

0:24:47.720 --> 0:24:50.120
<v Speaker 1>injury at the quarterback position here with Washington or Wentz

0:24:50.200 --> 0:24:51.520
<v Speaker 1>is going to be out for a while. I get

0:24:51.520 --> 0:24:54.320
<v Speaker 1>Heinikey back in here. So the two and four Washington

0:24:54.359 --> 0:24:57.280
<v Speaker 1>commanders are going to be taking on the Green Bay

0:24:57.280 --> 0:25:01.080
<v Speaker 1>Packers at home here in Washington, I point underdogs the

0:25:01.119 --> 0:25:03.520
<v Speaker 1>Packers five point favorites. Forty one and a half is

0:25:03.560 --> 0:25:06.240
<v Speaker 1>the over under. If you like Washington for another upset,

0:25:06.280 --> 0:25:09.600
<v Speaker 1>it's plus one eighty five. But for even this week

0:25:09.640 --> 0:25:12.040
<v Speaker 1>to week league, right, and sometimes we can't get to

0:25:12.359 --> 0:25:15.360
<v Speaker 1>invested in what was going on the last week. Yes,

0:25:15.560 --> 0:25:17.760
<v Speaker 1>it was ugly. Yes it's not what you expected if

0:25:17.800 --> 0:25:19.280
<v Speaker 1>you had the Packers and you thought that they were

0:25:19.280 --> 0:25:20.960
<v Speaker 1>going to blow out the Jets and handle their business.

0:25:21.000 --> 0:25:23.840
<v Speaker 1>They did not. But I almost feel like this five

0:25:23.920 --> 0:25:26.200
<v Speaker 1>is too small of a number against a team like Washington.

0:25:26.240 --> 0:25:27.080
<v Speaker 1>Do you agree?

0:25:28.200 --> 0:25:33.439
<v Speaker 5>No, I significantly downgraded. Finally, it was about time significantly

0:25:33.520 --> 0:25:35.399
<v Speaker 5>integrated the past rule.

0:25:35.359 --> 0:25:35.840
<v Speaker 1>To do it to you.

0:25:36.320 --> 0:25:36.639
<v Speaker 4>Yeah.

0:25:36.840 --> 0:25:39.520
<v Speaker 5>And the thing is I had, actually, even with the

0:25:39.720 --> 0:25:43.520
<v Speaker 5>preliminary projections that we had going into week six, I

0:25:43.560 --> 0:25:45.919
<v Speaker 5>still thought this week seven number was too high. So

0:25:46.080 --> 0:25:48.320
<v Speaker 5>and that was when it was seven. So I actually

0:25:48.400 --> 0:25:51.880
<v Speaker 5>have Washington plus seven in this spot. But I still

0:25:51.880 --> 0:25:54.040
<v Speaker 5>think there's value at five and a half is a

0:25:54.119 --> 0:25:57.000
<v Speaker 5>number that you see floating around at at MGM's also

0:25:57.080 --> 0:25:59.840
<v Speaker 5>at FanDuel. I think there's value at that number. I

0:25:59.840 --> 0:26:03.359
<v Speaker 5>have this at four point two five, so you know

0:26:03.480 --> 0:26:05.000
<v Speaker 5>a little bit of value there. If I had to

0:26:05.000 --> 0:26:06.720
<v Speaker 5>take a side here, it would be Washington.

0:26:07.680 --> 0:26:09.560
<v Speaker 1>All right, Pat fitz Morris, I'm gonna put you on

0:26:09.600 --> 0:26:11.800
<v Speaker 1>the spot here with the Green Bay Packers, But I

0:26:11.800 --> 0:26:14.520
<v Speaker 1>don't know. This feels like a good opportunity for a

0:26:14.560 --> 0:26:16.440
<v Speaker 1>get right game and to kind of write the ship

0:26:16.440 --> 0:26:19.080
<v Speaker 1>here for the Packers, because if this isn't then the

0:26:19.119 --> 0:26:21.720
<v Speaker 1>Packers are really headed in a bad direction. The Washington

0:26:21.760 --> 0:26:23.720
<v Speaker 1>Commanders are not a good football team. You're down to

0:26:23.720 --> 0:26:27.239
<v Speaker 1>the second string quarterback, That defense is not played well,

0:26:27.320 --> 0:26:29.440
<v Speaker 1>especially in the secondary. So what do you think about

0:26:29.440 --> 0:26:30.639
<v Speaker 1>this number here in this game?

0:26:31.320 --> 0:26:35.120
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I mean the instinct I almost want to spit

0:26:35.320 --> 0:26:38.400
<v Speaker 2>bet on Washington, But I'm not going to do that, Joe,

0:26:38.440 --> 0:26:42.280
<v Speaker 2>because I hear what you're saying, and it wouldn't shock

0:26:42.400 --> 0:26:45.760
<v Speaker 2>me if the Packers kind of pulled things together and

0:26:45.920 --> 0:26:49.880
<v Speaker 2>blew out Washington, which, as you mentioned, major problems on defense,

0:26:50.280 --> 0:26:53.520
<v Speaker 2>major problems on offense, a backup quarterback. They should never

0:26:53.600 --> 0:26:55.920
<v Speaker 2>have covered that Thursday night game against the Bears. I

0:26:55.960 --> 0:26:59.360
<v Speaker 2>mean the Bears just throwing an interception at the Washington

0:26:59.400 --> 0:27:03.440
<v Speaker 2>five yard failing to punch one in on fourth and

0:27:03.520 --> 0:27:06.080
<v Speaker 2>goal at like the one foot line, because they the

0:27:06.080 --> 0:27:08.240
<v Speaker 2>Bears decided to run their two hundred and ten pound

0:27:08.320 --> 0:27:11.040
<v Speaker 2>backup running back who just had like a sixty yard

0:27:11.080 --> 0:27:14.879
<v Speaker 2>run and was gassed, rather than David Montgomery. Just like

0:27:15.000 --> 0:27:18.720
<v Speaker 2>so many ways, the Bears blew that game, and like

0:27:19.680 --> 0:27:23.359
<v Speaker 2>the Washington franchise right now, just from the top down,

0:27:24.119 --> 0:27:25.040
<v Speaker 2>not in a good way.

0:27:25.840 --> 0:27:26.680
<v Speaker 3>Major problems.

0:27:26.720 --> 0:27:29.480
<v Speaker 2>And but you know, the Packers like they can't beat

0:27:29.520 --> 0:27:33.159
<v Speaker 2>anyone downfield anymore, which is unusual, which means teams are

0:27:33.160 --> 0:27:35.520
<v Speaker 2>playing safeties up and shutting down the running game.

0:27:36.080 --> 0:27:37.960
<v Speaker 3>The defense as holes.

0:27:37.960 --> 0:27:40.560
<v Speaker 2>They've got good cornerbacks, but they play zone like ninety

0:27:40.600 --> 0:27:44.800
<v Speaker 2>percent of the time, which foggles my mind. Like, I'm

0:27:44.840 --> 0:27:47.560
<v Speaker 2>probably just gonna not touch this game, as I do

0:27:47.680 --> 0:27:50.200
<v Speaker 2>with a lot of Packers games, because as a Packers fan,

0:27:50.240 --> 0:27:53.840
<v Speaker 2>I do not like betting on my team. You know,

0:27:53.920 --> 0:27:56.359
<v Speaker 2>sometimes I'll bet against them, but I can't do that

0:27:56.400 --> 0:27:58.399
<v Speaker 2>with Washington here, So I'm just gonna walk away and

0:27:58.760 --> 0:28:01.400
<v Speaker 2>let Friedman be wrong on the Packers yet again.

0:28:01.560 --> 0:28:03.840
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I'm gonna bet it for you. I'm done right now.

0:28:03.880 --> 0:28:06.399
<v Speaker 1>And again I'm somebody who's taken the shots at the

0:28:06.440 --> 0:28:09.520
<v Speaker 1>Packers these last few weeks and mostly have been right there.

0:28:09.760 --> 0:28:11.280
<v Speaker 1>But I think this is a game where you just

0:28:11.760 --> 0:28:14.040
<v Speaker 1>it's just outclass. And I think this is when you

0:28:14.119 --> 0:28:16.199
<v Speaker 1>tell those other the young wide receiver group that you

0:28:16.200 --> 0:28:18.199
<v Speaker 1>got Look, you go out there and you go make

0:28:18.240 --> 0:28:20.040
<v Speaker 1>some plays, and you gotta have some confidence. You gotta

0:28:20.080 --> 0:28:21.480
<v Speaker 1>have the ability to make some mistakes here and not

0:28:21.520 --> 0:28:23.520
<v Speaker 1>worry about it, because I think you can afford to

0:28:23.520 --> 0:28:25.760
<v Speaker 1>do that. Against Washington, I feel like that margin of

0:28:25.840 --> 0:28:27.320
<v Speaker 1>error hasn't been there for them, but it will be

0:28:27.359 --> 0:28:30.200
<v Speaker 1>there in this game. Speaking of the New York Jets,

0:28:30.240 --> 0:28:32.520
<v Speaker 1>by the way, who went in and beat the Packers

0:28:32.520 --> 0:28:34.920
<v Speaker 1>in Green Bay, I still can't believe that really happened.

0:28:35.480 --> 0:28:37.280
<v Speaker 1>Four and two are the New York Jets. They are

0:28:37.280 --> 0:28:39.840
<v Speaker 1>three point underdogs though against the Denver Broncos. We'll see

0:28:39.880 --> 0:28:41.800
<v Speaker 1>what the Broncos have in store for us tonight. Everyone

0:28:41.800 --> 0:28:44.200
<v Speaker 1>knows I'm done with the Broncos. I'm over it. I

0:28:44.200 --> 0:28:46.120
<v Speaker 1>don't care I need to see it anymore. Forty two

0:28:46.160 --> 0:28:48.000
<v Speaker 1>and a half is the number here if you like

0:28:48.040 --> 0:28:50.479
<v Speaker 1>the Jets, and maybe I do. At plus one thirty

0:28:50.520 --> 0:28:53.280
<v Speaker 1>eight heading to Denver. Now, Denver obviously a different environment.

0:28:53.920 --> 0:28:56.440
<v Speaker 1>You always have to deal with the altitude there. The

0:28:56.520 --> 0:28:58.760
<v Speaker 1>Jets are a team that offensively, you're not going to

0:28:58.800 --> 0:29:01.360
<v Speaker 1>really push the ball down. It's going to be more

0:29:01.400 --> 0:29:03.400
<v Speaker 1>of a ground and pound kind of attack. The defense

0:29:03.440 --> 0:29:06.680
<v Speaker 1>has played well. Can they take that formula pafits Morris

0:29:06.960 --> 0:29:09.440
<v Speaker 1>and can they take it to Denver? And can they

0:29:09.520 --> 0:29:11.160
<v Speaker 1>take it to the Broncos here in this line or

0:29:11.160 --> 0:29:11.920
<v Speaker 1>really look ahea.

0:29:12.160 --> 0:29:14.400
<v Speaker 2>I think they can with the way the Denver offense

0:29:14.440 --> 0:29:18.080
<v Speaker 2>has struggled so far, And even though the Jets did

0:29:18.400 --> 0:29:22.200
<v Speaker 2>very little through the air against Green Bay this past week,

0:29:22.240 --> 0:29:24.320
<v Speaker 2>it didn't matter because they've got Breece hollwho I think

0:29:24.400 --> 0:29:28.760
<v Speaker 2>has had more total yards from scrimmage through the first

0:29:28.840 --> 0:29:33.480
<v Speaker 2>six weeks of the season than any Jets since Curtis Martin, Like,

0:29:33.520 --> 0:29:35.600
<v Speaker 2>he's been really impressive. He's been kind of a one

0:29:35.600 --> 0:29:37.680
<v Speaker 2>man offense for them in the last couple of weeks,

0:29:37.720 --> 0:29:40.200
<v Speaker 2>and a one man offense might be enough against this

0:29:40.320 --> 0:29:45.479
<v Speaker 2>Denver offense which has really struggled. So I think the

0:29:45.520 --> 0:29:49.400
<v Speaker 2>line's about right. I think the total is about right.

0:29:49.920 --> 0:29:52.640
<v Speaker 2>I don't see really any value on either side here,

0:29:52.680 --> 0:29:54.800
<v Speaker 2>but the Jets could absolutely win this game if I

0:29:54.840 --> 0:29:56.760
<v Speaker 2>were going to put a bet down, it would probably

0:29:56.760 --> 0:29:58.080
<v Speaker 2>be Jets on the money line.

0:29:58.520 --> 0:30:01.000
<v Speaker 1>I love it, Jets on the money line. Let's go Friedman,

0:30:01.160 --> 0:30:02.880
<v Speaker 1>you gotta join hands with us or you see this

0:30:02.920 --> 0:30:03.560
<v Speaker 1>game differently.

0:30:04.000 --> 0:30:07.360
<v Speaker 5>No, I'm I'm on the Broncos and I feel dirty

0:30:07.400 --> 0:30:10.240
<v Speaker 5>about it. But and so we're doing this before Monday

0:30:10.280 --> 0:30:13.200
<v Speaker 5>night football, so you know, maybe anything we see in

0:30:13.200 --> 0:30:16.480
<v Speaker 5>this game could make me hate my bet, you know,

0:30:16.600 --> 0:30:20.160
<v Speaker 5>come come tomorrow morning. But I have this at Denver

0:30:20.200 --> 0:30:23.280
<v Speaker 5>minus five. And this is maybe more of a sort

0:30:23.280 --> 0:30:27.160
<v Speaker 5>of like faith based bet, and you know, sort of

0:30:27.160 --> 0:30:27.800
<v Speaker 5>a little.

0:30:27.600 --> 0:30:30.280
<v Speaker 1>What faith and what at this point because it can't

0:30:30.280 --> 0:30:32.000
<v Speaker 1>be the coaching, it can't be the quarterback play.

0:30:33.000 --> 0:30:37.360
<v Speaker 5>Yes, all of that is fair faith in a couple

0:30:37.400 --> 0:30:40.080
<v Speaker 5>of things. The defense is pretty good. I think that

0:30:40.160 --> 0:30:44.240
<v Speaker 5>the Jets offense is still a little bit fraudulent, Like

0:30:44.520 --> 0:30:47.840
<v Speaker 5>I still haven't seen Zach Wilson go out and really

0:30:47.960 --> 0:30:50.560
<v Speaker 5>do it against a good defense. And I do think

0:30:50.600 --> 0:30:54.440
<v Speaker 5>the Broncos have a good defense. So you know, the

0:30:54.480 --> 0:30:59.120
<v Speaker 5>home field advantage at my high stadium is pretty significant.

0:30:59.560 --> 0:31:01.840
<v Speaker 4>I don't know, I'm just not buying the Jets yet.

0:31:02.120 --> 0:31:05.120
<v Speaker 5>Maybe maybe after they go in to uh to mile

0:31:05.200 --> 0:31:07.680
<v Speaker 5>high and get the win outright, then I'll have more

0:31:07.720 --> 0:31:08.440
<v Speaker 5>respect for them.

0:31:08.520 --> 0:31:09.920
<v Speaker 4>I just I kind of don't have a lot of

0:31:09.920 --> 0:31:10.880
<v Speaker 4>respect for him right now.

0:31:11.240 --> 0:31:13.000
<v Speaker 1>Did you think the Green Bay Packers defense was good

0:31:13.000 --> 0:31:14.920
<v Speaker 1>coming into the year, Because certainly on paper.

0:31:15.320 --> 0:31:18.560
<v Speaker 5>I did think it was good. It's that it's not good.

0:31:18.920 --> 0:31:20.320
<v Speaker 5>It hasn't played well.

0:31:20.040 --> 0:31:22.080
<v Speaker 1>But I thought they were a good talented unit.

0:31:22.280 --> 0:31:25.920
<v Speaker 3>Yes, But can I just say something, Yeah, sure, I

0:31:26.000 --> 0:31:26.640
<v Speaker 3>was just gonna say.

0:31:26.680 --> 0:31:29.600
<v Speaker 2>I mean, the Jets passing game is one hundred percent fraudulented,

0:31:29.720 --> 0:31:31.760
<v Speaker 2>but they still have an offense now because of Breece

0:31:31.840 --> 0:31:34.520
<v Speaker 2>Hall and like Michael Carter is a reasonably good backup.

0:31:34.560 --> 0:31:38.080
<v Speaker 2>Like they've thrown one touchdown pass Zach Wilson has in

0:31:38.120 --> 0:31:40.840
<v Speaker 2>the three games since he's been back, and they've won

0:31:40.880 --> 0:31:41.720
<v Speaker 2>all those games.

0:31:42.120 --> 0:31:44.600
<v Speaker 3>Like it's it's that's not sustainable.

0:31:44.800 --> 0:31:47.920
<v Speaker 2>I know it's not, but like Breece Hall is sustainable,

0:31:48.320 --> 0:31:50.520
<v Speaker 2>Like he's generating enough offense for.

0:31:50.520 --> 0:31:53.600
<v Speaker 1>The what's sustainable, Sauce Gardner sustainable. And I don't think

0:31:53.600 --> 0:31:55.840
<v Speaker 1>we talk enough about quitting Williams in the front what

0:31:55.880 --> 0:31:58.320
<v Speaker 1>he's been doing. And we're not, I mean we're really not.

0:31:58.320 --> 0:31:59.920
<v Speaker 1>I mean the IDP show, we talked about it, which,

0:31:59.880 --> 0:32:01.320
<v Speaker 1>by the way, we have the IDP show over in

0:32:01.320 --> 0:32:02.880
<v Speaker 1>the Fantasy Pro side for those of you who play.

0:32:03.520 --> 0:32:06.080
<v Speaker 1>But we were talking about how difference maker he is

0:32:06.120 --> 0:32:09.200
<v Speaker 1>and when you have a shutdown corner, how that allows

0:32:09.200 --> 0:32:11.080
<v Speaker 1>you to get those cover shacks. It allows you to

0:32:11.160 --> 0:32:12.640
<v Speaker 1>do a lot more things. And if you could take

0:32:12.640 --> 0:32:15.560
<v Speaker 1>away Courtland Sutton in this game from the Denver Broncos.

0:32:15.960 --> 0:32:19.120
<v Speaker 1>That's been the biggest bugaboo for Russell Wilson is finding

0:32:19.160 --> 0:32:21.680
<v Speaker 1>other receivers. He has this tunnel vision that I've seen

0:32:21.760 --> 0:32:24.680
<v Speaker 1>all year for one wide receiver. On one play, his

0:32:24.720 --> 0:32:27.080
<v Speaker 1>head does not swivel, his head does not move, and

0:32:27.160 --> 0:32:30.280
<v Speaker 1>it was in full effect against the last week in

0:32:30.320 --> 0:32:32.200
<v Speaker 1>the Thursday Night football game when you saw kJ Hamler

0:32:32.240 --> 0:32:34.560
<v Speaker 1>completely wide open. He never even looked another way. All

0:32:34.560 --> 0:32:37.640
<v Speaker 1>he saw was Sutton, and all Sutton saw was Stefan Gilmore.

0:32:37.640 --> 0:32:39.720
<v Speaker 1>And I just don't know when that changes, and until

0:32:39.720 --> 0:32:43.400
<v Speaker 1>it does, I'm concerned about the Broncos. I'm concerned also

0:32:43.440 --> 0:32:45.600
<v Speaker 1>about the Las Vegas Raiders. At one and four, they

0:32:45.600 --> 0:32:48.200
<v Speaker 1>are seven point favorites tier against the Houston Texans, who

0:32:48.280 --> 0:32:50.080
<v Speaker 1>got their first win and took a week off. They

0:32:50.120 --> 0:32:53.040
<v Speaker 1>said go take a week off. Everybody, great job. We'll

0:32:53.120 --> 0:32:55.480
<v Speaker 1>come back in two weeks and we'll play again. Forty

0:32:55.480 --> 0:32:57.680
<v Speaker 1>four is the number plus two forty five in the

0:32:57.680 --> 0:33:00.800
<v Speaker 1>money line for the Houston Texans plus three hundred for

0:33:00.840 --> 0:33:04.680
<v Speaker 1>the Las Vegas Raids. So the Raiders are heavy favorites here, Friedman.

0:33:05.000 --> 0:33:07.400
<v Speaker 1>But that just kind of feels talk about dirty, talk

0:33:07.440 --> 0:33:11.080
<v Speaker 1>about uncomfortable, the Raiders being a heavy favorites period, just

0:33:11.400 --> 0:33:14.680
<v Speaker 1>full stop. That worries me. Does this line worry you?

0:33:16.360 --> 0:33:19.160
<v Speaker 5>I have it at seven and a half, actually, so

0:33:20.200 --> 0:33:23.080
<v Speaker 5>given that it's sitting at seven, I maybe should be

0:33:23.080 --> 0:33:26.680
<v Speaker 5>betting it. But as you say, like it's the Raiders,

0:33:26.960 --> 0:33:29.720
<v Speaker 5>I don't have I don't have a lot of optimism

0:33:29.760 --> 0:33:32.080
<v Speaker 5>with them. And the thing is like, in theory, the

0:33:32.120 --> 0:33:34.520
<v Speaker 5>advantage that they should have coming off of the buy

0:33:34.800 --> 0:33:37.840
<v Speaker 5>is negated because they're going against another team coming off

0:33:37.840 --> 0:33:41.480
<v Speaker 5>of the bye. So it's like, it's not like, what's

0:33:41.480 --> 0:33:43.400
<v Speaker 5>the point of the bye week, it's just that they

0:33:43.440 --> 0:33:44.160
<v Speaker 5>have no edge.

0:33:44.160 --> 0:33:47.320
<v Speaker 4>They're having rested for fourteen days.

0:33:47.400 --> 0:33:50.760
<v Speaker 5>So I don't know, seven and a half it feels

0:33:50.800 --> 0:33:52.560
<v Speaker 5>like a little bit too much and I don't have

0:33:52.720 --> 0:33:54.920
<v Speaker 5>enough faith in it to bet it all.

0:33:54.880 --> 0:33:56.080
<v Speaker 1>Right, how about you, Pat? When you look at this

0:33:56.120 --> 0:33:57.840
<v Speaker 1>game with the Raiders, seven, it's a pretty big number

0:33:57.840 --> 0:33:59.200
<v Speaker 1>for a team that's one and four and play the

0:33:59.240 --> 0:34:01.120
<v Speaker 1>way they have, especially on defense.

0:34:01.400 --> 0:34:03.680
<v Speaker 2>It is but this is actually the best I've felt

0:34:03.680 --> 0:34:06.160
<v Speaker 2>about a Raiders defense in a long time. Like, I

0:34:06.200 --> 0:34:10.320
<v Speaker 2>think this is a fairly respectable if not like good defense,

0:34:10.800 --> 0:34:14.720
<v Speaker 2>it's at least respectable. And they are versatile on offense,

0:34:14.800 --> 0:34:17.120
<v Speaker 2>like they have really gotten that running game going with

0:34:17.239 --> 0:34:21.360
<v Speaker 2>Josh Jacobs lately, and certainly DeVante Adams has added a

0:34:21.400 --> 0:34:25.399
<v Speaker 2>new dimension to their passing attack. It's weird, like DeVante's

0:34:25.520 --> 0:34:29.200
<v Speaker 2>catch rates and yards per target way down, but man,

0:34:29.239 --> 0:34:32.080
<v Speaker 2>he gives them a big play dimension that they didn't

0:34:32.120 --> 0:34:37.160
<v Speaker 2>necessarily have before. So, like I think the numbers right, Joe, seven,

0:34:37.680 --> 0:34:39.880
<v Speaker 2>I think that's exactly right, That's what I had projected

0:34:39.920 --> 0:34:42.359
<v Speaker 2>it at. I think there might be a little bit

0:34:42.440 --> 0:34:45.960
<v Speaker 2>of value in the under here though, because I do

0:34:46.000 --> 0:34:49.000
<v Speaker 2>have respect for this Raiders defense, and I still think,

0:34:49.120 --> 0:34:52.319
<v Speaker 2>you know, the Houston offense is a little under man

0:34:52.440 --> 0:34:55.239
<v Speaker 2>like Damian Pierce has been good for them, but still

0:34:55.280 --> 0:34:58.200
<v Speaker 2>not much of a passing game there. So I think

0:34:58.239 --> 0:35:00.280
<v Speaker 2>the total is maybe a point too high.

0:35:00.880 --> 0:35:02.439
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I feel like the Raiders are a team path

0:35:02.480 --> 0:35:04.640
<v Speaker 1>that are going to get better as the season goes on.

0:35:04.719 --> 0:35:06.279
<v Speaker 1>It's just how bad are they in the beginning in

0:35:06.360 --> 0:35:08.600
<v Speaker 1>terms of record, where it doesn't matter, like you gotta

0:35:08.640 --> 0:35:10.320
<v Speaker 1>take care of business, like you got to be Houston

0:35:10.360 --> 0:35:13.520
<v Speaker 1>at home. Here's a very simple game here. You got

0:35:13.520 --> 0:35:14.760
<v Speaker 1>to take take care of your business.

0:35:14.920 --> 0:35:18.880
<v Speaker 2>Friedman got me on the Raiders under for their season

0:35:18.920 --> 0:35:20.840
<v Speaker 2>long win total, and I'm glad they've gotten off to

0:35:20.880 --> 0:35:24.719
<v Speaker 2>this slow start because like this is a team that's

0:35:24.719 --> 0:35:26.440
<v Speaker 2>maybe a little better than I thought they were going

0:35:26.520 --> 0:35:30.359
<v Speaker 2>to be. Freedman pointed out some scheduling obstacles they have,

0:35:30.520 --> 0:35:33.560
<v Speaker 2>how they are actually you know, set up in kind

0:35:33.560 --> 0:35:37.000
<v Speaker 2>of a bad way. Maybe the NFL league office still

0:35:37.000 --> 0:35:39.240
<v Speaker 2>hates Al Davis and doesn't want to give the Raiders

0:35:39.239 --> 0:35:42.560
<v Speaker 2>any favors with scheduling. But Friedman pointed out that they

0:35:42.560 --> 0:35:46.480
<v Speaker 2>have kind of a treacherous path this season. So you know,

0:35:46.520 --> 0:35:49.680
<v Speaker 2>I'm glad that they've lost some close ones otherwise that

0:35:49.680 --> 0:35:51.719
<v Speaker 2>that might not be looking that great right now.

0:35:51.960 --> 0:35:54.800
<v Speaker 3>I think it was what was it, Friedman eight and eighty. Yeah,

0:35:54.840 --> 0:35:58.680
<v Speaker 3>So I don't know, they're they're better than I thought

0:35:58.719 --> 0:35:59.560
<v Speaker 3>they were going to be.

0:36:00.440 --> 0:36:02.600
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, they're gonna be dangerous though, if they ever start

0:36:02.640 --> 0:36:04.080
<v Speaker 1>to put it all together here and there's a lot

0:36:04.080 --> 0:36:06.440
<v Speaker 1>of new pieces, you know, do you know Devonte Adams

0:36:06.480 --> 0:36:09.200
<v Speaker 1>who had coached there's some newness there still that still

0:36:09.200 --> 0:36:12.479
<v Speaker 1>has got to come together. The Los Angeles Chargers three

0:36:12.520 --> 0:36:15.800
<v Speaker 1>and two home favorites by seven over the Seattle Seahawks,

0:36:15.800 --> 0:36:17.839
<v Speaker 1>who are five hundred team right now, three and three.

0:36:18.120 --> 0:36:20.800
<v Speaker 1>The number for this one is fifty two. Seattle on

0:36:20.840 --> 0:36:22.800
<v Speaker 1>the money line is plus two to fifty. Now, Pat,

0:36:22.840 --> 0:36:25.239
<v Speaker 1>if you like this game for offense, are you over

0:36:25.440 --> 0:36:26.200
<v Speaker 1>this fifty two?

0:36:27.680 --> 0:36:30.640
<v Speaker 2>Probably not gonna play the total here, Joe, Okay, I'm

0:36:30.680 --> 0:36:36.080
<v Speaker 2>more inclined to play Seattle, which you know, they've been

0:36:36.120 --> 0:36:40.040
<v Speaker 2>so unexpectedly proficient on offense this season, and then we

0:36:40.080 --> 0:36:42.479
<v Speaker 2>actually saw the defense show up in Week six again

0:36:42.560 --> 0:36:46.799
<v Speaker 2>get Cardinals, and like, I don't know what to make

0:36:46.840 --> 0:36:47.560
<v Speaker 2>of the Chargers.

0:36:48.080 --> 0:36:49.239
<v Speaker 3>I don't think.

0:36:49.000 --> 0:36:52.080
<v Speaker 2>They're as good after that lost to the Chiefs on

0:36:52.120 --> 0:36:54.560
<v Speaker 2>Thursday night in what we two, Like I thought the

0:36:54.680 --> 0:36:57.680
<v Speaker 2>Chargers look like a super Bowl caliber team in that game,

0:36:57.880 --> 0:37:01.560
<v Speaker 2>like they uh, you know, kind of I've had firepower

0:37:01.560 --> 0:37:05.600
<v Speaker 2>on both ends ever since that game. Things have sort

0:37:05.640 --> 0:37:08.160
<v Speaker 2>of crumbled for them a little bit, and I just

0:37:08.200 --> 0:37:10.480
<v Speaker 2>don't have the same feeling I had about them.

0:37:10.480 --> 0:37:14.040
<v Speaker 3>Injuries are part of it, but I don't know.

0:37:14.320 --> 0:37:17.960
<v Speaker 2>I think a touchdown might be too much in this one.

0:37:18.080 --> 0:37:19.640
<v Speaker 3>I kind of like the points with Seattle.

0:37:20.200 --> 0:37:21.400
<v Speaker 1>Are you the same mind, Freeman?

0:37:22.160 --> 0:37:25.319
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, I've already bet Seattle plus seven. I will say, though,

0:37:25.360 --> 0:37:29.160
<v Speaker 5>I have this projected at fifty four point seven, which

0:37:29.400 --> 0:37:32.920
<v Speaker 5>just feels ridiculous and I hate that number, and given

0:37:33.120 --> 0:37:36.839
<v Speaker 5>the under environment that we've seen, but there's no way

0:37:36.920 --> 0:37:38.080
<v Speaker 5>I feel like I can bet it.

0:37:38.600 --> 0:37:42.560
<v Speaker 4>But that is the projection. I mean, Seattle has allowed.

0:37:42.280 --> 0:37:45.759
<v Speaker 5>A ton of points minus whatever we saw yesterday with

0:37:45.800 --> 0:37:48.000
<v Speaker 5>the Cardinals, but they've allowed a ton of points this year.

0:37:48.520 --> 0:37:50.880
<v Speaker 5>The Chargers have been more of an over team as well.

0:37:51.880 --> 0:37:55.560
<v Speaker 5>So I do have this projected with significant value to

0:37:55.640 --> 0:37:57.600
<v Speaker 5>the over. But I just kind of want to go

0:37:57.640 --> 0:38:00.000
<v Speaker 5>in and manually change that projection because I'm not buying it.

0:38:00.800 --> 0:38:02.719
<v Speaker 1>All right, Let's see, we're buying the San Francisco forty

0:38:02.800 --> 0:38:05.520
<v Speaker 1>nine Ers. They are three point home underdogs to the

0:38:05.560 --> 0:38:07.840
<v Speaker 1>Kansas City Chiefs. The Chiefs come to town of dropping

0:38:07.840 --> 0:38:10.120
<v Speaker 1>that tough game to the bills where they had it

0:38:10.120 --> 0:38:12.200
<v Speaker 1>and lost it at the end. Forty seven is the

0:38:12.320 --> 0:38:14.719
<v Speaker 1>number on this one. If you like San Francisco to

0:38:14.760 --> 0:38:16.600
<v Speaker 1>win its plus one thirty five on the money line.

0:38:16.600 --> 0:38:18.160
<v Speaker 1>How do you see this one an early look at

0:38:18.200 --> 0:38:20.480
<v Speaker 1>Is there any value at all in your opinion, Freeman

0:38:20.600 --> 0:38:22.319
<v Speaker 1>on the Chiefs or San Francisco?

0:38:24.080 --> 0:38:24.319
<v Speaker 4>Yeah?

0:38:24.400 --> 0:38:26.719
<v Speaker 5>I have this projected at two and a half and

0:38:26.960 --> 0:38:29.520
<v Speaker 5>the you know, in the look ahead it was one

0:38:29.560 --> 0:38:32.120
<v Speaker 5>and a half. In the early line, it was two

0:38:32.200 --> 0:38:34.600
<v Speaker 5>and a half, and now it's moved to three. So

0:38:35.040 --> 0:38:38.840
<v Speaker 5>you know, in theory there's some value on San Francisco

0:38:38.960 --> 0:38:41.720
<v Speaker 5>here as an underdog like Jimmy Garoppolo as an underdog

0:38:41.880 --> 0:38:44.600
<v Speaker 5>historically has done well. But it is such an injured

0:38:44.920 --> 0:38:47.640
<v Speaker 5>San Francisco team right now on both sides of the

0:38:47.680 --> 0:38:50.160
<v Speaker 5>ball that I don't think you can take them. And

0:38:50.160 --> 0:38:52.200
<v Speaker 5>if I had to take any side on here, it

0:38:52.239 --> 0:38:53.640
<v Speaker 5>would be Kansas City.

0:38:54.160 --> 0:38:54.560
<v Speaker 3>All right?

0:38:54.600 --> 0:38:56.880
<v Speaker 1>How about you? Pat Fitzmorris, do you see it the

0:38:56.880 --> 0:38:57.319
<v Speaker 1>same way?

0:38:58.160 --> 0:39:00.680
<v Speaker 2>No, I'm not taking Kansas City anym. They've hurt me

0:39:00.800 --> 0:39:03.600
<v Speaker 2>too badly the last two weeks, so I'm not gonna

0:39:03.600 --> 0:39:05.600
<v Speaker 2>be on them. And I had this one projected as

0:39:05.719 --> 0:39:07.759
<v Speaker 2>Kansas City is a one point favorite, so I do

0:39:07.840 --> 0:39:10.279
<v Speaker 2>see some value with the forty nine ers, but as

0:39:10.320 --> 0:39:14.560
<v Speaker 2>Friedman said, they've got some injury issues, so I'm not

0:39:14.719 --> 0:39:16.800
<v Speaker 2>going to bet the early line until we get a

0:39:16.800 --> 0:39:22.160
<v Speaker 2>little more clarity on some of those injuries. Yeah, and

0:39:23.120 --> 0:39:28.040
<v Speaker 2>the total seems about right, but man, I don't love

0:39:28.120 --> 0:39:32.520
<v Speaker 2>Kansas City going on the road and covering the three too,

0:39:32.600 --> 0:39:35.319
<v Speaker 2>being right on that key number, Like if this moves down,

0:39:36.000 --> 0:39:38.960
<v Speaker 2>I don't know, maybe you do.

0:39:39.040 --> 0:39:42.759
<v Speaker 5>You like San Francisco enough to where you think if

0:39:42.800 --> 0:39:44.759
<v Speaker 5>it hits three and a half you're betting it.

0:39:45.120 --> 0:39:46.399
<v Speaker 3>I would bet them at three and a half.

0:39:46.480 --> 0:39:49.880
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, yeah, I don't know if this I'm skeptical this

0:39:49.920 --> 0:39:52.560
<v Speaker 5>would hit three and a half. But I mean if

0:39:52.560 --> 0:39:55.200
<v Speaker 5>you like San Francisco at one, I think go ahead

0:39:55.200 --> 0:39:58.280
<v Speaker 5>and take them at three. You know, like their injury

0:39:58.320 --> 0:40:01.600
<v Speaker 5>issues aren't going to get worse, Like that's already baked

0:40:01.600 --> 0:40:04.760
<v Speaker 5>into the line, and maybe they get better, like maybe

0:40:04.760 --> 0:40:07.120
<v Speaker 5>they get Bosa back this week, maybe they start to

0:40:07.120 --> 0:40:09.880
<v Speaker 5>get some of their players back, so that might be

0:40:09.960 --> 0:40:14.040
<v Speaker 5>something to factor into it. Like if you like San

0:40:14.120 --> 0:40:17.040
<v Speaker 5>Francisco threes, I mean, as you say, like they're at

0:40:17.040 --> 0:40:18.600
<v Speaker 5>home they're a good team.

0:40:19.040 --> 0:40:21.120
<v Speaker 4>I don't know if it's going to get better than three.

0:40:21.400 --> 0:40:24.360
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, Like I don't hold that loss to Atlanta against

0:40:24.400 --> 0:40:26.319
<v Speaker 2>them that much. I mean it's a West Coast team

0:40:26.520 --> 0:40:29.280
<v Speaker 2>going out east playing an early start game. We often

0:40:29.320 --> 0:40:31.560
<v Speaker 2>see those teams kind of stumble like that, So I'm

0:40:31.600 --> 0:40:33.960
<v Speaker 2>not I don't know, I feel like that is being

0:40:34.000 --> 0:40:37.160
<v Speaker 2>held against the forty nine ers with this line, and

0:40:37.480 --> 0:40:40.840
<v Speaker 2>I like, I don't consider that like a horrendous loss

0:40:40.880 --> 0:40:41.640
<v Speaker 2>for the forty nine ers.

0:40:41.680 --> 0:40:44.319
<v Speaker 3>I'm sure their fans do, but you know, we see

0:40:44.360 --> 0:40:45.880
<v Speaker 3>slip ups like that all the time.

0:40:46.280 --> 0:40:48.720
<v Speaker 5>I think also part of what's going into this line

0:40:48.920 --> 0:40:52.000
<v Speaker 5>is some maybe like kind of newfound respect for the

0:40:52.120 --> 0:40:56.640
<v Speaker 5>Chiefs because like people were really on the Bills entering

0:40:56.680 --> 0:40:58.840
<v Speaker 5>that game, and the Chiefs were right there.

0:40:58.960 --> 0:40:59.600
<v Speaker 4>Like the Chiefs.

0:40:59.800 --> 0:41:02.520
<v Speaker 5>I wouldn't say that like they lost the game versus

0:41:02.560 --> 0:41:05.200
<v Speaker 5>the Bills winning it, but like they showed like, at

0:41:05.280 --> 0:41:07.840
<v Speaker 5>least in my opinion, like they showed that. I was

0:41:07.880 --> 0:41:10.560
<v Speaker 5>like impressed with both of those teams coming out of

0:41:10.560 --> 0:41:10.879
<v Speaker 5>that win.

0:41:11.239 --> 0:41:13.719
<v Speaker 1>I was like also had some more opportunities, Like is say,

0:41:13.760 --> 0:41:15.560
<v Speaker 1>Mackenzie had a couple key drops in that game, And

0:41:15.600 --> 0:41:18.320
<v Speaker 1>I think I think the Bills could have the Bills

0:41:18.320 --> 0:41:20.839
<v Speaker 1>could have been the Bills that people were anticipating. There

0:41:20.840 --> 0:41:22.560
<v Speaker 1>were a couple of moments where they didn't take advantage

0:41:22.600 --> 0:41:26.400
<v Speaker 1>of those opportunities. But the Chiefs, to their credit, didn't

0:41:26.480 --> 0:41:28.319
<v Speaker 1>lay down. They kept fighting. They were in this game.

0:41:28.360 --> 0:41:29.759
<v Speaker 1>They had the lead in the last couple of minutes

0:41:29.760 --> 0:41:31.560
<v Speaker 1>of the game. Like everything that you expected from the

0:41:31.600 --> 0:41:34.560
<v Speaker 1>Chiefs in their peak was there. But I think what

0:41:34.680 --> 0:41:37.520
<v Speaker 1>showed is that that big playmaking ability to Tyree Hill

0:41:37.600 --> 0:41:39.520
<v Speaker 1>not being that offense. It hurts this offense. It hurts

0:41:39.560 --> 0:41:42.399
<v Speaker 1>their ability in those games against teams like Buffalo that

0:41:42.520 --> 0:41:44.359
<v Speaker 1>was lacking for sure. I mean, Juju had a couple

0:41:44.400 --> 0:41:46.040
<v Speaker 1>of moments, but you know, maybe if somebody makes the

0:41:46.120 --> 0:41:48.879
<v Speaker 1>right tackle. We don't have those moments for Juju. Let's

0:41:48.880 --> 0:41:52.000
<v Speaker 1>get to a game that I think is terribly difficult.

0:41:52.080 --> 0:41:53.359
<v Speaker 1>I gotta tell you, I think this is the most

0:41:53.360 --> 0:41:56.719
<v Speaker 1>difficult one on the slate. Miami Dolphins theoretically getting to

0:41:56.840 --> 0:41:59.960
<v Speaker 1>a back. We think they are seven point favorites. Again,

0:42:00.000 --> 0:42:02.320
<v Speaker 1>it's the Pittsburgh Steelers who just won at home against

0:42:02.360 --> 0:42:04.440
<v Speaker 1>Tom Brady the Buccaneers. Forty four and a half is

0:42:04.480 --> 0:42:06.239
<v Speaker 1>a number the Steelers are plus two forty on the

0:42:06.280 --> 0:42:08.719
<v Speaker 1>money line. Friedman, I don't know what to do with

0:42:08.800 --> 0:42:10.280
<v Speaker 1>this game. What do you make of this one?

0:42:11.120 --> 0:42:14.520
<v Speaker 5>I have Miami as a seven point seventy five favorite,

0:42:14.600 --> 0:42:18.160
<v Speaker 5>So you know, given that this is at seven, there's

0:42:18.320 --> 0:42:20.880
<v Speaker 5>you know, a little bit of value there being able

0:42:20.920 --> 0:42:23.600
<v Speaker 5>to get it on the key number, and I have

0:42:23.760 --> 0:42:26.480
<v Speaker 5>bet it at seven. I did bet it on the

0:42:26.520 --> 0:42:29.719
<v Speaker 5>look ahead because I assumed the too would be coming back.

0:42:30.520 --> 0:42:32.280
<v Speaker 5>I don't know if there's much of a difference between

0:42:32.320 --> 0:42:35.080
<v Speaker 5>Kinny Pickett and Mitchell Trubisky in terms of like the

0:42:35.160 --> 0:42:38.239
<v Speaker 5>quarterback situation for the Steelers, to be honest, So I

0:42:38.280 --> 0:42:40.440
<v Speaker 5>don't know if that factors too much into the number,

0:42:40.640 --> 0:42:43.160
<v Speaker 5>But I do think that this should be above seven,

0:42:43.800 --> 0:42:45.480
<v Speaker 5>all right, Pat, Do you see it the same way?

0:42:46.120 --> 0:42:46.719
<v Speaker 3>Not at all.

0:42:47.239 --> 0:42:50.440
<v Speaker 2>I kind of see it the other way that, Like

0:42:50.480 --> 0:42:55.120
<v Speaker 2>I've got this at Miami by five. I have a

0:42:55.120 --> 0:42:59.440
<v Speaker 2>little more respect for Pittsburgh and think, well, there's some

0:42:59.560 --> 0:43:03.600
<v Speaker 2>ambigie a quarterback, Like we don't know if Kenny Pickett

0:43:03.640 --> 0:43:05.480
<v Speaker 2>is going to be able to play next week, but

0:43:06.000 --> 0:43:10.400
<v Speaker 2>like I think this offense is it's got more teeth

0:43:10.560 --> 0:43:12.840
<v Speaker 2>than maybe it had at the beginning of the season,

0:43:13.440 --> 0:43:15.920
<v Speaker 2>and you know, part of that is renewed life in

0:43:15.960 --> 0:43:18.160
<v Speaker 2>the passing game, and we saw Chase Claypole kind of

0:43:18.160 --> 0:43:22.080
<v Speaker 2>spring to life last week. Three very good wide receivers,

0:43:22.160 --> 0:43:26.280
<v Speaker 2>like I think they're capable of scoring with Miami, and

0:43:26.840 --> 0:43:30.800
<v Speaker 2>Miami's past defense is pretty terrible, quite frankly.

0:43:30.520 --> 0:43:30.680
<v Speaker 1>So.

0:43:32.760 --> 0:43:36.480
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, like, I don't know, I have too much respect,

0:43:36.520 --> 0:43:38.719
<v Speaker 2>I think for Mike Tomlin and Pittsburgh, and maybe that's

0:43:38.760 --> 0:43:42.040
<v Speaker 2>a too much respect for a team that hasn't necessarily

0:43:42.080 --> 0:43:44.600
<v Speaker 2>always earned it this year, but this just feels like

0:43:44.600 --> 0:43:46.839
<v Speaker 2>too big a number to me, all.

0:43:46.800 --> 0:43:49.279
<v Speaker 1>Right, Last one on this late the Chicago Bears a

0:43:49.280 --> 0:43:51.360
<v Speaker 1>two to four head to New England. New England is

0:43:51.400 --> 0:43:53.960
<v Speaker 1>seven and a half point favorites at home. We still

0:43:53.960 --> 0:43:57.200
<v Speaker 1>have quarterback uncertainty in this game as well a lot

0:43:57.239 --> 0:43:59.520
<v Speaker 1>of games where you don't know exactly who is going

0:43:59.560 --> 0:44:02.320
<v Speaker 1>to be under for those teams. But regardless, New England

0:44:02.320 --> 0:44:04.800
<v Speaker 1>seems to be playing very good defense these last few weeks.

0:44:05.120 --> 0:44:08.720
<v Speaker 1>Great game against the Cleveland Browns, a very good performance

0:44:08.760 --> 0:44:10.320
<v Speaker 1>in Green Bay a few weeks ago in a shutout

0:44:10.320 --> 0:44:12.799
<v Speaker 1>against the Lions. In between, thirty nine and a half

0:44:12.920 --> 0:44:15.160
<v Speaker 1>is the over under for this one, Pat, what do

0:44:15.160 --> 0:44:16.759
<v Speaker 1>you think of this number? Seven and a half? It's

0:44:16.760 --> 0:44:19.880
<v Speaker 1>a big number for New England, not a prolific theoretical offense,

0:44:19.920 --> 0:44:22.440
<v Speaker 1>but from a defensive standpoint and the lack of offense

0:44:22.480 --> 0:44:24.680
<v Speaker 1>in the Chicago side. Do you think this is a

0:44:24.719 --> 0:44:25.560
<v Speaker 1>comfortable number?

0:44:26.000 --> 0:44:26.879
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, you've said it, Joe.

0:44:26.920 --> 0:44:29.040
<v Speaker 2>It does seem like a big number, especially for a

0:44:29.040 --> 0:44:33.200
<v Speaker 2>game with what a thirty nine point total, So you know, like, I.

0:44:33.200 --> 0:44:36.160
<v Speaker 1>Hate that is what they're telling you one right right.

0:44:36.000 --> 0:44:40.400
<v Speaker 2>And it might be that the Chicago offense has certainly struggled.

0:44:40.600 --> 0:44:44.560
<v Speaker 3>The weird thing is, Joe, like, I like New England much.

0:44:44.400 --> 0:44:47.319
<v Speaker 2>Less at this number if Mac Jones comes back, Like

0:44:47.400 --> 0:44:50.000
<v Speaker 2>I think, if Mac Jones comes back at seven and

0:44:50.040 --> 0:44:53.120
<v Speaker 2>a half, I might put a little something on the Bears.

0:44:53.640 --> 0:44:56.080
<v Speaker 2>If it's Bailey Zappy again, I think I'll probably just

0:44:56.120 --> 0:44:59.960
<v Speaker 2>walk away because this line seems right. But I'm kind

0:44:59.960 --> 0:45:03.640
<v Speaker 2>of of anticipating Mac Jones comes back this week, and like,

0:45:04.239 --> 0:45:07.680
<v Speaker 2>I don't know, I think if Mac Jones does come back,

0:45:07.960 --> 0:45:09.880
<v Speaker 2>there's going to be some rust. I think we're going

0:45:09.920 --> 0:45:14.959
<v Speaker 2>to see yet another solo primetime Ugly Monday or Bears game,

0:45:15.480 --> 0:45:17.920
<v Speaker 2>Like can we get the Bears off of primetime please,

0:45:18.400 --> 0:45:20.919
<v Speaker 2>Like this is their third prime time game already, Oh

0:45:20.960 --> 0:45:23.239
<v Speaker 2>my goodness. Like I know, I know you want to

0:45:23.239 --> 0:45:25.319
<v Speaker 2>do it early in the season before their record is

0:45:25.400 --> 0:45:27.719
<v Speaker 2>trash and and you know no one wants to see

0:45:27.760 --> 0:45:31.640
<v Speaker 2>them and wall or whatever. But I mean, for the

0:45:31.680 --> 0:45:34.319
<v Speaker 2>love of God, like they're they're losing viewers here, this

0:45:34.440 --> 0:45:34.840
<v Speaker 2>is bad.

0:45:34.920 --> 0:45:36.360
<v Speaker 3>Get the Bears off at primetime?

0:45:36.760 --> 0:45:37.120
<v Speaker 4>All right?

0:45:37.160 --> 0:45:38.920
<v Speaker 1>How about you here, Friedman? What do you see in

0:45:38.960 --> 0:45:39.920
<v Speaker 1>this contest?

0:45:40.120 --> 0:45:43.680
<v Speaker 5>I have it at six point seventy five, So in theory,

0:45:43.800 --> 0:45:47.000
<v Speaker 5>you know, under the seven, given that you're you're having

0:45:47.000 --> 0:45:49.279
<v Speaker 5>the hook here, like there's value there, But I just

0:45:49.560 --> 0:45:53.240
<v Speaker 5>I don't trust it. I am factoring in mac Jones

0:45:53.920 --> 0:45:55.920
<v Speaker 5>plane in this number.

0:45:57.360 --> 0:45:59.920
<v Speaker 4>I don't know. I think it's Bears or nothing for me,

0:46:00.200 --> 0:46:01.280
<v Speaker 4>and it's probably nothing.

0:46:02.120 --> 0:46:04.080
<v Speaker 1>Airs are nothing, all right, Freed, But let's stick with you.

0:46:04.080 --> 0:46:07.440
<v Speaker 1>Give me a favorite three look ahead week seven wagers

0:46:07.440 --> 0:46:09.600
<v Speaker 1>that you want to lock in now before the line

0:46:09.640 --> 0:46:10.160
<v Speaker 1>start moving?

0:46:11.360 --> 0:46:14.480
<v Speaker 4>Okay, if only I said it about it?

0:46:14.520 --> 0:46:14.880
<v Speaker 1>Please?

0:46:15.000 --> 0:46:18.160
<v Speaker 5>I mean, you know, gee, it's it's very weird because

0:46:18.200 --> 0:46:20.840
<v Speaker 5>I felt like I had a good read on things

0:46:20.920 --> 0:46:22.680
<v Speaker 5>last week. I had had a couple of kind of

0:46:22.719 --> 0:46:25.520
<v Speaker 5>like mediocre, like break even weeks, and then last week

0:46:25.600 --> 0:46:28.080
<v Speaker 5>was good. I had a seven and three week, and

0:46:29.000 --> 0:46:30.920
<v Speaker 5>this week I just don't feel as good about it

0:46:30.960 --> 0:46:33.160
<v Speaker 5>as I did last week. But I you know, I

0:46:33.200 --> 0:46:37.760
<v Speaker 5>still like Lions at plus seven on the road in Dallas.

0:46:37.800 --> 0:46:41.280
<v Speaker 4>I do like the Lions there. I still like the Ravens.

0:46:42.239 --> 0:46:43.360
<v Speaker 4>Here's the thing I hate.

0:46:43.480 --> 0:46:46.880
<v Speaker 5>I kind of hate being like the square like oh,

0:46:46.920 --> 0:46:49.360
<v Speaker 5>I like the home favorite, you know, with like the

0:46:49.440 --> 0:46:51.880
<v Speaker 5>Ravens here with a large number. But I still like

0:46:51.920 --> 0:46:54.880
<v Speaker 5>the Ravens at minus six as home favorites going against

0:46:54.880 --> 0:46:58.040
<v Speaker 5>a Browns team that I think is is floundering and

0:46:58.320 --> 0:47:01.160
<v Speaker 5>hasn't had any record of success within division.

0:47:01.680 --> 0:47:05.000
<v Speaker 4>So I like that. And then one.

0:47:04.880 --> 0:47:08.440
<v Speaker 5>More here I will I will say the under in

0:47:08.520 --> 0:47:12.840
<v Speaker 5>Tampa Bay Carolina under forty one. I think that is

0:47:12.880 --> 0:47:15.799
<v Speaker 5>a that is a bet that I probably like the

0:47:15.840 --> 0:47:17.759
<v Speaker 5>most out of all of the totals because I just

0:47:17.800 --> 0:47:19.920
<v Speaker 5>don't see either of these teams really putting up a

0:47:19.960 --> 0:47:20.520
<v Speaker 5>lot of points.

0:47:21.280 --> 0:47:24.040
<v Speaker 1>Fitz Morris, what tickles your fancy here in the early

0:47:24.080 --> 0:47:25.120
<v Speaker 1>look ahead for week seven?

0:47:25.400 --> 0:47:28.160
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so I'm very much with Friedman on the Ravens here,

0:47:28.280 --> 0:47:31.680
<v Speaker 2>especially coming off the bad loss like the Browns defense

0:47:31.760 --> 0:47:35.920
<v Speaker 2>has just been absolute trash and I'm kind of surprised

0:47:35.960 --> 0:47:37.640
<v Speaker 2>this line is what it is. I'm going to take

0:47:37.640 --> 0:47:41.480
<v Speaker 2>the Ravens. That's a confident four star play for me

0:47:41.840 --> 0:47:44.640
<v Speaker 2>this week, which is the kiss of death.

0:47:44.680 --> 0:47:45.080
<v Speaker 3>Of course.

0:47:46.080 --> 0:47:48.480
<v Speaker 2>You know, I'm going to join the Twitter mob with

0:47:48.520 --> 0:47:51.040
<v Speaker 2>their torches and pitchforks on Thursday nights, and I'm going

0:47:51.080 --> 0:47:52.759
<v Speaker 2>to take a pitchfork, and I'm going to bet the

0:47:53.080 --> 0:47:56.360
<v Speaker 2>Saints getting points against an Arizona team that should not

0:47:56.400 --> 0:47:59.480
<v Speaker 2>be favored against, you know, almost anyone, much less a

0:47:59.520 --> 0:48:04.359
<v Speaker 2>fairly spectable Saints team. So I'll take the Saints. Theren Man,

0:48:04.400 --> 0:48:07.120
<v Speaker 2>I'm gonna take this Pittsburgh game. I'm gonna have to

0:48:07.160 --> 0:48:10.360
<v Speaker 2>take a second look if Friedman is that different from it.

0:48:10.440 --> 0:48:13.520
<v Speaker 2>I certainly respect Friedman's acumen on these things, and if

0:48:13.560 --> 0:48:17.120
<v Speaker 2>we're like two and a half, what two point seventy

0:48:17.200 --> 0:48:19.759
<v Speaker 2>five points apart, I'm gonna have to take a closer look.

0:48:19.800 --> 0:48:21.799
<v Speaker 2>But as of now, I kind of like Pittsburgh as

0:48:21.800 --> 0:48:22.880
<v Speaker 2>a road dog in Miami.

0:48:23.480 --> 0:48:26.400
<v Speaker 1>All Right, we'll all re examine our acumens throughout the

0:48:26.440 --> 0:48:28.680
<v Speaker 1>week and we'll see how lines move, and of course,

0:48:28.680 --> 0:48:30.839
<v Speaker 1>stay up to date with everything over at bettingpros dot

0:48:30.880 --> 0:48:33.200
<v Speaker 1>com for all of the latest in terms of the

0:48:33.280 --> 0:48:35.640
<v Speaker 1>news and notes of what's going on in the betting world.

0:48:35.719 --> 0:48:37.920
<v Speaker 1>Do I have college football as well? Make sure you

0:48:37.920 --> 0:48:40.440
<v Speaker 1>subscribe to our YouTube channel as well. Betting Pros is

0:48:40.480 --> 0:48:42.719
<v Speaker 1>on the YouTube. If you don't know, click that little

0:48:42.719 --> 0:48:44.759
<v Speaker 1>bell for notifications when you sign up. Make sure you

0:48:44.760 --> 0:48:46.520
<v Speaker 1>do that, and don't forget to go out there and

0:48:46.600 --> 0:48:49.560
<v Speaker 1>play that over undergame. It's available on Sleeper right now.

0:48:49.600 --> 0:48:52.440
<v Speaker 1>That's again can be found at Sleeper dot app slash

0:48:52.440 --> 0:48:54.560
<v Speaker 1>betting Pros and use that promo code betting Pros when

0:48:54.600 --> 0:48:57.400
<v Speaker 1>you sign up to get that one hundred dollars deposit match.

0:48:57.680 --> 0:48:59.360
<v Speaker 1>And that'll do it for us. But the story of

0:48:59.400 --> 0:49:01.239
<v Speaker 1>the game goes on on for Pat and Matt. I'm

0:49:01.320 --> 0:49:08.000
<v Speaker 1>Joey P. We'll see you next time kids. M