Super Bowl 52 -- Discuss
Poll
 | 4 votes (16%) | ||
| | 4 votes (16%) | ||
| | 1 vote (4%) | ||
| | 3 votes (12%) | ||
| | 7 votes (28%) | ||
| | 3 votes (12%) | ||
| | 1 vote (4%) | ||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| | 3 votes (12%) | ||
| | 4 votes (16%) |
25 members have voted
I wrote about this before, but here is my basic strategy for handicapping. To start, some statistics over the 2017 regular season:
Pats points scored per game: 28.6
Pats points allowed per game: 18.5
Eagles points scored per game: 28.6
Eagles points allowed per game: 18.4
Amazingly, both teams are nearly the same on average points scored and allowed! What are the odds?
You can get expected points scored by either team by averaging average points scored per game and points allowed by the other team. That gives us:
Patriots: 23.5
Eagles: 23.55
Point spread on Patriots: +0.05 (let's just call it zero)
Over/under: 47.05 (let's just say 47)
However, the AFC is tougher division. I think it would be fair to shift the point spread by 3 the Pats way for that. Given the zero spread otherwise, that makes the Pats a 3-point favorite.
However, on simply an emotional basis, I hate to bet against the Patriots. They seem to find a way to win in key games almost every time, although often my small margins. Unless I get some trusted advice, which I may get, I'll not bet the game straight up either way. On the over/under, with 47 expected points scored, I would easily take the under if you put a gun to my head, but I don't think it is worth laying the juice over.
What do you think?
The question for the poll is what combination of winner against the spread and the over/under do you like?
Quote: Wizard
However, the AFC is tougher division. I think it would be fair to shift the point spread by 3 the Pats way for that. Given the zero spread otherwise, that makes the Pats a 3-point favorite.
Respectfully disagree. Perhaps specific matchups were a factor, but the AFC went 23-41 against the NFC this year.
Either way, I like the Pats straight up, but that could be the homer in me.
I have no opinion on the total.
Quote: Mission146Respectfully disagree. Perhaps specific matchups were a factor, but the AFC went 23-41 against the NFC this year.
That's a good point. However, every year in the off-season the books post a line on the conference to win the Super Bowl. The AFC lately has been a 2.5 to 3 point favorite.
Quote: WizardThat's a good point. However, every year in the off-season the books post a line on the conference to win the Super Bowl. The AFC lately has been a 2.5 to 3 point favorite.
I believe that has to do with two things:
1.) The AFC went 33-30-1 against the NFC during the 2016 Regular Season.
2.) The Patriots won the Super Bowl and were the preseason favorites to win the Super Bowl this year.
Additionally, from:
https://www.betfirm.com/super-bowl-odds/
Here were the odds as of 8/29:
TEAM BOVADA BMAKER BETONLINE
Patriots +325 +315 +350
Packers +800 +965 +1000
Raiders +1000 +1624 +1400
Seahawks +1200 +942 +1000
Steelers +1200 +827 +1200
Falcons +1200 +1061 +1200
Cowboys +1400 +1470 +1200
Giants +1800 +2088 +1400
Texans +2500 +2459 +2000
Panthers +2500 +2875 +2800
Broncos +2800 +2462 +2500
Chiefs +2800 +2608 +2200
Cardinals +3300 +3290 +3300
Bucs +3300 +3951 +3300
Titans +3300 +3671 +3300
Vikings +4000 +3818 +2800
Eagles +4000 +3671 +4000
Colts +5000 +5700 +5000
Saints +5000 +5700 +4000
Ravens +5000 +6300 +5000
Chargers +5000 +4800 +6600
Redskins +5000 +7500 +6600
Bengals +5000 +7500 +5000
Lions +6600 +6700 +6600
Dolphins +7500 +6000 +6600
Jaguars +10000 +10000 +6600
Bills +15000 +18000 +10000
Bears +15000 +18000 +20000
Rams +15000 +19000 +15000
Jets +30000 +40000 +25000
49ers +30000 +26500 +25000
Browns +30000 +23000 +25000
Last Updated 08/29 08/29 08/29
So your more, "Likely," teams, which I would say would be the Top Six, were half AFC and half NFC, but the Patriots were obviously considered far more likely than the Packers, and the Raiders were considered considerably more likely than the second NFC team to appear.
In other words, I don't know that the AFC is the better conference, I would say the NFC is the better overall conference...but that probably wasn't the perception after the 2016 season. I think that the AFC's top two or three teams are generally considered better than those of the NFC, but overall, well, the AFC has the Browns.
Wizard, if you'd like to book bets on the different props, I'll blindly bet all the underdogs, IF we set the line to the mid-point between both odds. IE: +200 and -300 goes to +/-250 and +600 and -750 goes to +/-675. Like what happened last year, with DJTeddyBear (IIRC).
I prefer to bet on some of the high paying props. I did well last year. Among my big scores was Yes Overtime.
Hey Wiz! I’m ready to let you get some back. Are you taking action this year?
You recall correctly. We did the easy midpoint rather than calculate the fair middle. People told me I was giving up a couple bucks but what’s a couple bucks between friends?Quote: RS... mid-point between both odds. IE: +200 and -300 goes to +/-250 and +600 and -750 goes to +/-675. Like what happened last year, with DJTeddyBear (IIRC).
Quote: DJTeddyBearI didn’t vote. I’m not concerned with the winner or total points. Hell, I don’t even care who’s playing.
I prefer to bet on some of the high paying props. I did well last year. Among my big scores was Yes Overtime.
Hey Wiz! I’m ready to let you get some back. Are you taking action this year?
You recall correctly. We did the easy midpoint rather than calculate the fair middle. People told me I was giving up a couple bucks but what’s a couple bucks between friends?
Patriots will win the game, but not against the spread. They are too good at figuring out what the other side is doing and adjusting. No team can beat that. I'm going for the over due to excellent field conditions and less than stellar defenses, but that's just a feeling.
Quote: WizardThat's a good point. However, every year in the off-season the books post a line on the conference to win the Super Bowl. The AFC lately has been a 2.5 to 3 point favorite.
That line is not based on the conference strength vs one another as a whole.
First is the WWE of it all. Back in my day (late 80's / early 90's), these guys seemed larger than life. It wasn't so much they were peak athletes, but there was a superhero-ness to it all. Pomp and circumstance. It wasn't just a "meaningful NFC game" with "playoff implications", it was an epic battle of Rice vs Sanders, almost a game within a game. Teams had meaning, they had "crews". Teams had a certain look and vibe you could expect to see and be familiar with, while today it seems to be but a bunch of guys that happen to play for Team X this week. There's no more Montanya and Rice, Kelly and Reed/Lofton, Marino and Clayton/Duper. No more hard nose, old school tough guys like Atwater and Lott that helped define a team's vibe. It's all just gone, with few exceptions like your Rogers and Brady. Put all 30 teams in practice jerseys and the only person you'll be able to pick out is Danny Amendola.
But by far what's killed it is the simple loss of respect. I was engaged in worship of one of my heroes recently and the contrast is stark indeed. When you watch Barry Sanders run, it's not his skills and talents which shine the most for me. When I watch that man go, what I see is heart. A man that no matter how "meaningless" the game or how impotent his team, is gonna give 100% every time he's asked to do a job. And to top it off, how selflessly it's done. THAT'S the clincher for me. How many bad shots he'd take in those days, and never getting in someone's face. When he runs 40-60-80 yards for a TD, there's no waving goodbye to opponents, no pointing to the camera, no idiotic, self serving dance number in the endzone, no slow up and skip into the paint. He ran hard as balls until he crossed the line, dropped the ball, returned to the sideline.
That man is everything I aspired and still aspire to be as an athlete, and while admittedly out of the loop for a long time, this last year of getting back into football has been pretty much devoid of anything that I grew to love all those years ago. Now it's pampered princesses doing choreograph for an 8yrd catch. It's personalized taunting for converting a second and short. It's "please notice me and only me for every single thing I do, even though the majority of this is completely ordinary". Who gets turned on by this trash?
Oh yeah, Super Bowl. Refs over Eagles, 31 - 27.
Miss you, Mr Sanders.
Quote: FaceI've pin pointed what's killed foosball for me.
First is the WWE of it all. Back in my day (late 80's / early 90's), these guys seemed larger than life. It wasn't so much they were peak athletes, but there was a superhero-ness to it all. Pomp and circumstance. It wasn't just a "meaningful NFC game" with "playoff implications", it was an epic battle of Rice vs Sanders, almost a game within a game. Teams had meaning, they had "crews". Teams had a certain look and vibe you could expect to see and be familiar with, while today it seems to be but a bunch of guys that happen to play for Team X this week. There's no more Montanya and Rice, Kelly and Reed/Lofton, Marino and Clayton/Duper. No more hard nose, old school tough guys like Atwater and Lott that helped define a team's vibe. It's all just gone, with few exceptions like your Rogers and Brady. Put all 30 teams in practice jerseys and the only person you'll be able to pick out is Danny Amendola.
But by far what's killed it is the simple loss of respect. I was engaged in worship of one of my heroes recently and the contrast is stark indeed. When you watch Barry Sanders run, it's not his skills and talents which shine the most for me. When I watch that man go, what I see is heart. A man that no matter how "meaningless" the game or how impotent his team, is gonna give 100% every time he's asked to do a job. And to top it off, how selflessly it's done. THAT'S the clincher for me. How many bad shots he'd take in those days, and never getting in someone's face. When he runs 40-60-80 yards for a TD, there's no waving goodbye to opponents, no pointing to the camera, no idiotic, self serving dance number in the endzone, no slow up and skip into the paint. He ran hard as balls until he crossed the line, dropped the ball, returned to the sideline.
That man is everything I aspired and still aspire to be as an athlete, and while admittedly out of the loop for a long time, this last year of getting back into football has been pretty much devoid of anything that I grew to love all those years ago. Now it's pampered princesses doing choreograph for an 8yrd catch. It's personalized taunting for converting a second and short. It's "please notice me and only me for every single thing I do, even though the majority of this is completely ordinary". Who gets turned on by this trash?
Oh yeah, Super Bowl. Refs over Eagles, 31 - 27.
Miss you, Mr Sanders.
Great post, Face. Agree 100%, specifically about Barry Sanders. Awesome soldier under all conditions.
For me it was Fran Tarkenton. He would never grandstand, no play was out of the question regardless of personal peril, always looking for 1 more yard, one more foot, whatever it took. Didn't hurt that he had the greatest front 4 in NFL history, but he was always the first to give them credit, too.
I really dislike the stupid grandstanding and celebration not just after every touchdown, but every sack, every interception, every fumble, every completed pass, every...ad nauseum. The sportscasters have taken to showing highlights of stupid end zone stuff rather than discouraging it, so it just gets longer and more elaborate all the time. Bleah. As someone famous said ince, "Act like you've been there before."
Quote: FinsRuleI'm going to bet Pats win but don't cover. I'm not going to worry about the total.
That is a distinct possibility in this game, knowing how the Patriots play.
On any other game, I usually perceive value in underdog money lines. However, the Super Bowl is different. I think a lot of underdog players bet the money line while favorite players lay the points. That creates value on the favorite money line. Right now the best available is at Stations at -180. I'd be tempted to bet it if I were there. I show on average a 5-point favorite has a 66.2% chance of winning, making the money line fair at -196.
Quote: WizardThat is a distinct possibility in this game, knowing how the Patriots play.
On any other game, I usually perceive value in underdog money lines. However, the Super Bowl is different. I think a lot of underdog players bet the money line while favorite players lay the points. That creates value on the favorite money line. Right now the best available is at Stations at -180. I'd be tempted to bet it if I were there. I show on average a 5-point favorite has a 66.2% chance of winning, making the money line fair at -196.
I agree with that, but in the OP you concluded that your opinion is that a -5 spread is not correct and it should be a -3 spread. If we assume that -3 is the appropriate spread, then the fair ML according to your work is -149, which makes -180 putrid.
That's the thing about something like this, at some point you have to make a non-correlative decision one way or another. I guess what I'm saying is that, ultimately (if not for a parlay) a bettor must make a call on what the ML or Point Spread should be and go from there. In the OP, you said the line should be -3 which makes a -180 ML awful.
Besides that, some of the casinos have NE -4.5 laying the same 110 at this point, MGM Mirage appears to have the Patriots at -4.5 at Even Money, no lay. Going by your work and assuming that there is generally a lay on that, then I would assume that even -180 is actually bad.
On the other hand, one can always choose to assume that the books had it right to begin with. I disagree with that only because we know that the books often try to steer the action one way or another...especially with a game that's going to have a lot of betting volume...rather than just trying to guess right. I think they try to guess right on a normal game.
The thing about that is that the average open was something like Patriots -5.5 as well as Patriots -215 to -240 on the Money Line. Therefore, if you assume that Vegas has it right and the public is wrong in steering it the other way, then -180 becomes outstanding.
I don't know. I just don't think there is any great angle that can be played for one game, unless there is maybe an angle that allows you to parlay a line with some props that are not only advantageous on their own, but also correlate in a positive fashion with your ATS or ML pick that you also believe to be advantageous.
At the end of the day, you just have to believe that a line or spread is wrong because it's wrong.
I might add that I don't know what I'm talking about. I usually bet based on just the numbers. The bottom line is my brain says bet the Eagles but my heart says bet the Patriots.
Quote: WizardYes, I stand by that going by this season the Patriots and Eagles are almost equal in terms of the differential between points won and points allowed. It is only the AFC strength that makes me favor the Patriots, which you and others have disputed is even legitimate. So why are the Patriots 4.5 or 5 point favorites? They simply know how to win. Maybe not by a huge margin. This has been said before, but they often blow it the first quarter or two but they figure out what the opponent is doing and make adjustments to win the game. The last Super Bowl and the the AFC Championship game last weekend are perfect examples. As much as I don't like the Patriots on an emotional level, they are a smart team. I might add that last season the Eagles were 7 and 9. The Patriots have dominated the game since 2002. I think there is a sense that the Eagles are lucky to be there.
I might add that I don't know what I'm talking about. I usually bet based on just the numbers. The bottom line is my brain says bet the Eagles but my heart says bet the Patriots.
I agree with your original assertion. The points differential tends to be the first thing that I look at with the second being common opponents from the previous season mixed with common opponents in a current season as it gets further along in the season.
You pick better than I do, of course, so that's one thing to keep in mind.
The Patriots are that kind of a favorite because of public perception. I think Vegas might have thought that the public perception wouldn't even be as close as it apparently is, hence the -6 opening lines at a bunch of places. Another possible factor is maybe Vegas assumes that Gronk will be healthy by then and the public sees that, "Questionable," and loves it. I think the public also sees that the only time a Brady-led Patriots has ever won a Super Bowl by more than four points it came in overtime. Limited sample size, of course, but you and I may know that but the public doesn't.
The funny thing is that everything you said about the Eagles should make the line move Patriots, and it's moving the other way.
I don't know what the line should be, maybe Pats minus a non-zero number. I like them to win straight up for the reasons you stated and would take them at even money. There's no real point spread that I would touch.
Quote: WizardYes, I stand by that going by this season the Patriots and Eagles are almost equal in terms of the differential between points won and points allowed. It is only the AFC strength that makes me favor the Patriots, which you and others have disputed is even legitimate. So why are the Patriots 4.5 or 5 point favorites? They simply know how to win. Maybe not by a huge margin. This has been said before, but they often blow it the first quarter or two but they figure out what the opponent is doing and make adjustments to win the game. The last Super Bowl and the the AFC Championship game last weekend are perfect examples. As much as I don't like the Patriots on an emotional level, they are a smart team. I might add that last season the Eagles were 7 and 9. The Patriots have dominated the game since 2002. I think there is a sense that the Eagles are lucky to be there.
I might add that I don't know what I'm talking about. I usually bet based on just the numbers. The bottom line is my brain says bet the Eagles but my heart says bet the Patriots.
The spread is a product of the Wentz injury. If Wentz was healthy it would be Pats -0.5 or a Eagles -0.5
Quote: PokerGrinderThe spread is a product of the Wentz injury. If Wentz was healthy it would be Pats -0.5 or a Eagles -0.5
They sure love their QBR's.
If you look at career stats, (always a somewhat limited sample size, unless you're looking at TB12 who has played for 72 years) there's not the sort of drop off that you would think would account for a 4-5.5 spread difference.
Quote: Wizard=but they often blow it the first quarter or two but they figure out what the opponent is doing and make adjustments to win the game. The last Super Bowl and the the AFC Championship game last weekend are perfect examples
I thought the same thing, though I'm not sure if the facts support that narrative or not. What I do know is that as of a few hours ago, Iggles first half was +165 at MGM, which is a little off the market price.
Win by 3
Win by 3
Win by 3
Lose by 3
Lose by 4
Win by 4
OT Win
I would be very surprised if this game wasn't close.
Quote: FinsRuleBrady/Belichick Super Bowl results
Win by 3
Win by 3
Win by 3
Lose by 3
Lose by 4
Win by 4
OT Win
I pick win by 3.
Wizard,I will offer you 10 to 1 and take up to $20.Quote: WizardI pick win by 3.
Quote: WizardYes, I stand by that going by this season the Patriots and Eagles are almost equal in terms of the differential between points won and points allowed. It is only the AFC strength that makes me favor the Patriots, which you and others have disputed is even legitimate. So why are the Patriots 4.5 or 5 point favorites? They simply know how to win. Maybe not by a huge margin. This has been said before, but they often blow it the first quarter or two but they figure out what the opponent is doing and make adjustments to win the game. The last Super Bowl and the the AFC Championship game last weekend are perfect examples. As much as I don't like the Patriots on an emotional level, they are a smart team. I might add that last season the Eagles were 7 and 9. The Patriots have dominated the game since 2002. I think there is a sense that the Eagles are lucky to be there.
I might add that I don't know what I'm talking about. I usually bet based on just the numbers. The bottom line is my brain says bet the Eagles but my heart says bet the Patriots.
I would be happy to take the Eagles at +4.5 for 100 if you would like a little action.
Quote: speedycrapWizard,I will offer you 10 to 1 and take up to $20.
I'll take it for the full $20. Please confirm.
NE wins exact by 3 points. 10 to 1 Wizard takes $20 to win $200. Deal.Quote: WizardI'll take it for the full $20. Please confirm.
Quote: PokerGrinderThe spread is a product of the Wentz injury. If Wentz was healthy it would be Pats -0.5 or a Eagles -0.5
In 2013 Foles had a QB rating of 119.2 which is a higher rating than Brady had in any year and the 3rd highest in the history of the NFL for any one year. Peyton Manning had a higher rating than that in only ONE year and it wasn't much higher.
When Foles brings his A game he is as good as anybody.
https://www.playnevada.com/2665/william-hill-super-bowl-bets/amp/
I give NE tons of credit and recognize their dynasty and history.... however.... this year there will be no last play end zone interception to lock the game up! There will be no come from 20 points behind in the second half. The Eagles are going to rattle Tommy Boy.. and when Tommy Boy gets less than 10 seconds to throw as he usually does, he is horrible! Last week he had to resort to hail mary passes looking for pass interference calls... and he got them against the jags. Not in this Superbowl! Eagles will dethrone the Pats in a high scoring affair!
For those who think Foles cant get the job done. Wrong. Although it has been our defense that has been doing an amazing job for the eagles and the entire team is to credit, Foles is quite capable. What people dont realize nor talk about is that the first two games Foles came off the bench to play in were sub zero temperatures and 40 mph winds. How do you think most qbs that were cozy on the bench all year and then had to come in to play in that type of weather condition would do.... not well im sure.
When the weather heated up and no winds to factor against the top defense in NFC Vikings.... he dominated them! Now we are going to play in a dome! Foles will light it up again. Tom will do ok. Eagles will win .... 27-24
Quote: speedycrapNE wins exact by 3 points. 10 to 1 Wizard takes $20 to win $200. Deal.
7-1 on Bovada. Good bet Wizard.
Quote: speedycrapNE wins exact by 3 points. 10 to 1 Wizard takes $20 to win $200. Deal.
I confirm the confirmation.
Quote: beachbumbabsI would be happy to take the Eagles at +4.5 for 100 if you would like a little action.
Thanks, but I'll pass.
There are three things that pushed the spread up to 6 last Sunday night:
While the Wentz injury is definitely the biggest reason the Patriots are favored, the Patriots improvement over the course of the season is also significant. The first four games of the season was one of the worst four game stretches in the entire Brady/Belichick era. Had those games happened any other time during the year, it would be hard to overlook. But most people think their defense in February has no resemblance to their defense from September. The Patriots brand could also be moving the spread slightly higher than it should
Prop s for longest fg are about 2 yards longer than for Longest TD.
known members only, please.
Quote: WatchMeWinEagles will win .... 27-24
If Eagles win I owe you $50. If Pats win we are even. Is it a bet?
Quote: SOOPOOIf Eagles win I owe you $50. If Pats win we are even. Is it a bet?
Response by PM.
Quote: WizardResponse by PM.
My bet was with WatchMeWin. I owed him $20.
All of your handicapping analysis is worth zippo, because the majority of the information was generated by an Eagles team with Wentz, who would have been league MVP. His replacement has done pretty well, but there wasn't a team in the league that wanted Foles as a starting QB this year. If Brady went down and wasn't playing, don't you think that would be your FIRST consideration in handicapping the game? We will never know, but I surmise the game would be a pick'em game if Wentz was QB.
By the way, I think the line of 5 presupposes Gronk is playing. If he is ruled out I could see the line dropping to 3.
Quote: SOOPOOWiz-
All of your handicapping analysis is worth zippo, because the majority of the information was generated by an Eagles team with Wentz, who would have been league MVP. His replacement has done pretty well, but there wasn't a team in the league that wanted Foles as a starting QB this year. If Brady went down and wasn't playing, don't you think that would be your FIRST consideration in handicapping the game? We will never know, but I surmise the game would be a pick'em game if Wentz was QB.
By the way, I think the line of 5 presupposes Gronk is playing. If he is ruled out I could see the line dropping to 3.
I'm going to disagree with you because of career stat line. Like I said before, I think Foles is certainly a drop from Wentz, but not a drop off to the tune of five points.
Quote: SOOPOOWiz-
All of your handicapping analysis is worth zippo,
Well, I did say it was rudimentary.
Can anyone quote touchdowns per game by both QB's? I am running late to get to a movie and don't have time to search it.
I plan to post pictures of the prop sheets later. For now, here are lines on some I routinely bet every year.
| Prop | WH | CGT | Wynn | Caesars | MGM |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First score TD | -140 | -145 | -155 | -165 | |
| Last score TD | -160 | -200 | -180 | -200 | |
| No safety | -700 | -1000 | -850 | -900 | |
| No overtime | -800 | -1000 | -850 | -1000 | -1000 |
| No two-point conversion | -220 | -300 | -300 | -300 | |
| Field goals under 3.5 | 105 | -125 | |||
| Punts under 7.5 | -110 | ||||
| Punts under 8.5 | -125 | 110 | |||
| Team to score first wins | -155 | -180 | -185 | -200 | |
| Team to score last wins | -175 | -210 | -160 | -200 | |
| No 3-point margin of victory | -360 | -600 | -500 | -600 | |
| Total touchdowns under 5.5 | -105 | -115 | |||
| Largest lead under 13.5 | 130 | 170 | |||
| Largest lead under 14.5 | -110 | ||||
| Scoreless quarter -- NO | -400 | -330 | |||
| Total pts Jake Elliot un 7.5 | 100 | ||||
| Total pts Gostkowski un 8.5 | 100 | ||||
| Jake Elliot field goald un 1.5 | 125 | 100 | |||
| Gostkowski field goals un 1.5 | 160 | 125 | |||
| Patriots first score TD | -135 | ||||
| Patriots last score TD | -125 | ||||
| Patriots score in every qtr -- NO | -120 | -230 | |||
| Eagles score in every qtr -- NO | -160 | -450 | -380 |
Quote: WizardWell, I did say it was rudimentary.
Can anyone quote touchdowns per game by both QB's? I am running late to get to a movie and don't have time to search it.
Wentz-1.6897
Foles-1.3864 (As starter, so it's apples to apples. Wentz has started every game in which he's ever made an appearance.)
Quote: Mission146Wentz-1.6897
Foles-1.3864 (As starter, so it's apples to apples. Wentz has started every game in which he's ever made an appearance.)
Are you sure? Those numbers seem very low. The average NFL game has about five touchdowns so 2.5 per team, on average. Not to mention this is a good team. Perhaps these were just passing touchdowns?
Then again, these statistics on Foles do not look very impressive.
Quote: WizardAre you sure? Those numbers seem very low. The average NFL game has about five touchdowns so 2.5 per team, on average. Not to mention this is a good team. Perhaps these were just passing touchdowns?
Then again, these statistics on Foles do not look very impressive.
As always, it is easy to twist the importance of a single stat. I think the stat quoted is how many TD passes each QB throws, not how many TD drives each QB leads, which may end in a running TD. I can't state it enough. NO TEAM felt Foles was good enough to be their starting QB. Cleveland could have signed him. Houston could have signed him. Indianapolis could have signed him.
Is Philly's D and other good offensive players good enough to overcome Brady and the generally average NE roster? We shall see next Sunday. Having watched a lot of NE games this year, I think if they had Edelman they would have been a full notch better than they were.
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: WizardAre you sure? Those numbers seem very low. The average NFL game has about five touchdowns so 2.5 per team, on average. Not to mention this is a good team. Perhaps these were just passing touchdowns?
Then again, these statistics on Foles do not look very impressive.
As always, it is easy to twist the importance of a single stat. I think the stat quoted is how many TD passes each QB throws, not how many TD drives each QB leads, which may end in a running TD. I can't state it enough. NO TEAM felt Foles was good enough to be their starting QB. Cleveland could have signed him. Houston could have signed him. Indianapolis could have signed him.
Is Philly's D and other good offensive players good enough to overcome Brady and the generally average NE roster? We shall see next Sunday. Having watched a lot of NE games this year, I think if they had Edelman they would have been a full notch better than they were.
No team felt Foles was good enough to be a starting QB. Now, he could be the hottest commodity out there this off season. I don't understand the Foles hate. Not counting the game they rested him in, he started 4 games. They won all 4 and he played well in 3 of them.
Here are the QBs the Patriots lost to this year: QBR in parentheses
Alex Smith (7)
Cam Newton (19)
Jay Cutler (24)
Here are the top 3 QBs the Patriots beat:
Drew Brees (9)
Matt Ryan (5)
Ben Rothlisberger (6)
Look at his career stats compared to Alex Smith. Very similar.
Foles win-loss record as a starter for Eagles: 19-11
Wentz win-loss record as a starter for Eagles: 18-11
Quote: FinsRule
Foles win-loss record as a starter for Eagles: 19-11
Wentz win-loss record as a starter for Eagles: 18-11
Ahhh.... so you are saying the Eagles are just stupid? They let Foles go for nothing? They didn't realize how good he was even though he was on their team? Foles had one of the best years a QB has ever had a few years back, but since then was a TOTAL BUST. (Until last few games of course!) I am not saying he won't do enough to beat NE with his overall better team, but any team that ties its long term plans to Foles is likely making an error. Not 100% sure (see Keenum), but I'd take Darnold/Rosen/Mayfield/Jackson over Foles without blinking an eye.
And using Wentz career record is useless. His record this year is what matters, as it was with THIS team. If you really believe the Eagles are as good or better with Foles than Wentz, well, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell to you.
Foles was 6-2 in 2014 when he got hurt.
Went to Jeff Fisher, the master of developing QBs (SARCASM), and had one bad season.
Now he's back and has been a capable NFL qb. Total bust, come on man.
Would they be better off in this game with Wentz? Probably. But Nick Foles has played in 3 playoff games. Wentz has played in 0. How did Goff do in his first playoff game? How did Prescott do last year?
The difference between Foles and Wentz is that with Wentz the spread is NE -3. With Foles it's NE -4.5. I think the game is more about the Eagles defense. The Eagles will be able to score some points on the Patriots. Their defense is good enough to make teams work hard for points, but that's it. I don't think Belichick is going to load the box and dare Foles to beat them. That's not his usual gameplan.
What you said is absolutely right, the Eagles have better players than the Pats. But the Pats are still more likely to win the game.
