Post-Super Bowl News and Notes Thread
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
Worth noting that Hightower sat out vs. Buffalo and may have been dealing with the shoulder injury all season. He didn't play just one game with it.
Save your $10...he was at the post-game party last night. And he's going to write about in the offseason
Save your $10...he was at the post-game party last night. And he's going to write about in the offseason
jamisonhensley Jamison Hensley
Cody faces animal cruelty charge involving a dog, animal abuse and neglect involving an alligator as well as a charge for drug possession
The felonies carry a maximum of three years in prison.
Cody faces animal cruelty charge involving a dog, animal abuse and neglect involving an alligator as well as a charge for drug possession
The felonies carry a maximum of three years in prison.
Next year's SB odds:
I think the Ravens are too low, and the Colts too high.
http://espn.go.com/blog/baltimore-ravens/post/_/id/17848/odds-on-ravens-winning-the-2016-super-bowl
I think the Ravens are too low, and the Colts too high.
http://espn.go.com/blog/baltimore-ravens/post/_/id/17848/odds-on-ravens-winning-the-2016-super-bowl
Dallas intrigues me at 18-1 but multiple factors would hold be back from pulling the trigger.
1) Romo's age and injuries. He'll be 35 to start the season and his back is... bad.
2) They aren't in a good place salary-cap wise.
3) That defense still looks particularly vulnerable especially in the secondary.
4) The NFC is loaded.
1) Romo's age and injuries. He'll be 35 to start the season and his back is... bad.
2) They aren't in a good place salary-cap wise.
3) That defense still looks particularly vulnerable especially in the secondary.
4) The NFC is loaded.
The teams on this line are interesting:
Rams, Chiefs, Cardinals, Chargers, Giants: 40-1
The Rams and Cards' chances depend on them getting a QB and keeping him healthy. The Giants just need to stay healthy.
Rams, Chiefs, Cardinals, Chargers, Giants: 40-1
The Rams and Cards' chances depend on them getting a QB and keeping him healthy. The Giants just need to stay healthy.
SMU_Sox said:
I'm in the small minority of people who think that Murray should not be resigned by Dallas. He's a great RB, but has been historically injury-prone and much of his success this year was due to a great offensive line. Joseph Randle would of had like 1300+ rushing yards with the same cast. Save the $$$ for Dez and shore up that secondary.
Of course, the Cowboys are run by an ignoramus and will probably pay Murray generously for his decline.
Colts at 12-1 is an ok speculation
I could see them playing for the AFC championship, after that ???
,
Broncos at 12-1 over-priced, with or without Peyton
I could see them playing for the AFC championship, after that ???
,
Broncos at 12-1 over-priced, with or without Peyton
Two Irish guys claim to have bluffed their way into the Super Bowl. They say they ended up watching the game from the 4th row alongside Lawyer Milloy who gave them a running commentary on the game. I wonder if anyone can get Lawyer to confirm this happened.
Irish Independent
Irish Independent
SandoESPN Mike Sando, ESPN.com
Wilson with Butler on field: 6-12 for 107 yards and INT (25.7 QBR). Butler off: 6-9 for 127 yards, 2 TD, 0 INT (99.2 QBR). Coincidence?
SandoESPN Mike Sando, ESPN.com
Brady with Avril on field: 15-23 passing, 106 yds, 0 TD, 2 INT, 24.8 QBR. No Avril: 22-27, 214 yds, 4 TD, 0 INT, 97.7 QBR. Coincidence?
Wilson with Butler on field: 6-12 for 107 yards and INT (25.7 QBR). Butler off: 6-9 for 127 yards, 2 TD, 0 INT (99.2 QBR). Coincidence?
SandoESPN Mike Sando, ESPN.com
Brady with Avril on field: 15-23 passing, 106 yds, 0 TD, 2 INT, 24.8 QBR. No Avril: 22-27, 214 yds, 4 TD, 0 INT, 97.7 QBR. Coincidence?
Those are pretty similar numbers with the exception of the TD's and INTs for Brady. He threw two TD's before Avril went out with an injury and the second INT had nothing to do with a pass rush or Avril.
Both of these seem to be coincidences, not indicative of the impact of a certain player
Both of these seem to be coincidences, not indicative of the impact of a certain player
Francesa not alone in his anger, via the Herald:
LAS VEGAS — If being $3.3 million richer after Sunday's Super Bowl is what Nevada sports books consider a worst case scenario, imagine the riches if a last minute play, second-guessed around the world, had gone a little differently.
"I can't even tell you how many millions of dollars changed hands," said Johnny Avello, director of the Wynn's sports and race book of the game-ending moment that had the Seahawks throwing an interception at the end zone. He and others banked on a Seahawks win since the Patriots were favored, ever so slightly.
The state's 191 sports books won $3.3 million of the total $116 million wagered on the Super Bowl, said Nevada Gaming Control Board officials Monday.
The amount was a drop from last year's record-breaking bets totaling $119.4 million when sports books kept $19.7 million after the Seattle Seahawks' easily overtook the Denver Broncos 43-8.
Wynn, Westgate Las Vegas and William Hill sports book operators said the New England Patriots' 28-24 win over the Seattle Seahawks represented the worst case scenario for their businesses based on the bets placed. Plenty was at stake with gamblers wagering six-figures, in some cases, for either team. At least one gambler wagered $1 million on the Patriots.
"That bet happened here," Avello said.
But for the grace of side bets some of the sports books' losses might have been greater
LAS VEGAS — If being $3.3 million richer after Sunday's Super Bowl is what Nevada sports books consider a worst case scenario, imagine the riches if a last minute play, second-guessed around the world, had gone a little differently.
"I can't even tell you how many millions of dollars changed hands," said Johnny Avello, director of the Wynn's sports and race book of the game-ending moment that had the Seahawks throwing an interception at the end zone. He and others banked on a Seahawks win since the Patriots were favored, ever so slightly.
The state's 191 sports books won $3.3 million of the total $116 million wagered on the Super Bowl, said Nevada Gaming Control Board officials Monday.
The amount was a drop from last year's record-breaking bets totaling $119.4 million when sports books kept $19.7 million after the Seattle Seahawks' easily overtook the Denver Broncos 43-8.
Wynn, Westgate Las Vegas and William Hill sports book operators said the New England Patriots' 28-24 win over the Seattle Seahawks represented the worst case scenario for their businesses based on the bets placed. Plenty was at stake with gamblers wagering six-figures, in some cases, for either team. At least one gambler wagered $1 million on the Patriots.
"That bet happened here," Avello said.
But for the grace of side bets some of the sports books' losses might have been greater
So, what was the issue that caused the sports books to make less coin? Were the casinos banking on a Seattle win and took that position when setting the lines?
Anyway, that's a lot of people walking into the casinos, and so I'm wondering if they are able to quantify the residual from this.
Anyway, that's a lot of people walking into the casinos, and so I'm wondering if they are able to quantify the residual from this.
Probably. The idea that the books always set lines to balance the action on either side is a silly myth that gets repeated a lot but doesn't capture the reality of the contemporary sports betting business very well. Balancing action is very hard, especially in a big game where you have many large bets coming in, and often the books are very happy to have unbalanced action and bet against the public. In fact, the absolute best case scenario for a large sports book is not to have balanced action and simply make the vig but to have the public on the "wrong" side of a line. I have no idea what happened in this particular instance.lexrageorge said:
I think if I understand it, you use the vig to set a floor for yourself, and then use the lines to manipulate potential upside scenarios. Prop bets have a higher vig, too, so they basically allow the casinos now to gamble with the free money that the vig represents. But I didn't realize how heavily they have action on the games. The vig on $120 million in action with balanced betting should be closer to a $15 million vig, depending on how much prop betting action you take. If the result was really the worst case scenario, that means the books had about $12 million on the game, which is a massive amount to me. That starts to be a number where you really do have to worry about someone reaching out to a ref or a player. Given that multiple times that amount are account for in illegal betting, and I assume there are even more risks out there, although I don't think that kind of betting is nearly as centralized.
On a completely different topic, did anyone here Belichick do his WEEI interview yesterday? He said a few things that were fascinating. One of them was that toward end of the game, when all the tv cameras and security come down onto the field, you get a breakdown in the communication between the coaches and the teams. I couldn't tell if he was saying that somehow the electronics get fouled up, or that it just gets chaotic and stuff, but I think he was using it to partly explain his thinking on not calling a time out.
The other thing was the way he ended the interview, in which he got as animated as you'll typically ever hear him, to defend Pete Carroll. He basically called everyone who was criticizing the play call idiots and said he was disappointed in hearing opinions from people who have no qualification to judge the situation.
On a completely different topic, did anyone here Belichick do his WEEI interview yesterday? He said a few things that were fascinating. One of them was that toward end of the game, when all the tv cameras and security come down onto the field, you get a breakdown in the communication between the coaches and the teams. I couldn't tell if he was saying that somehow the electronics get fouled up, or that it just gets chaotic and stuff, but I think he was using it to partly explain his thinking on not calling a time out.
The other thing was the way he ended the interview, in which he got as animated as you'll typically ever hear him, to defend Pete Carroll. He basically called everyone who was criticizing the play call idiots and said he was disappointed in hearing opinions from people who have no qualification to judge the situation.
Reiss had some of the quotes:
http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=12277589
Also talks about not taking a timeout.
http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=12277589
SMU_Sox said:
1 and 4 are the biggest barriers, but 2 and 3 can be easily addressed. They're currently sitting at just a hair under $7.5 million under the cap. Henry Melton is as good as gone, which will save them another $8.5 million. They could also cut Brandon Carr after June 1 to save another $8 million. They could also get rid of something known as "Dekoda Watson" and save another $1.25 million.
So they could have $17.25 mil to play with at the start of free agency, minus whatever they give to Dez, plus whatever they get back from the almost inevitable restructuring of Romo's contract (that cap number, woof). They'd need to address running back - I'm assuming Murray will be gone - and bring in some defensive line and secondary help and be set up for a possible deep run.
It's not the greatest cap situation, but they'll have a ton more wiggle room than they did last offseason.
E5 Yaz said:
I call BS on the Avril numbers. Brady had 2TDs in the first half and didn't throw his second pick until the 3rd quarter. No way those numbers are accurate.
Silverdude2167 said:
Byrdbrain said:
Got it. He was not on the field for the 2 first half TDs because he was subbed out for those plays. I call BS on me.
Only two QBs in NFL history have ever lost a playoff game despite averaging at least 11 yards/attempt (min 20 pass attempts):
Russell Wilson, 2/1/15
Jeff Hostetler, 1/15/94 (29-23 loss to Oakland)
In total, they're 24-2.
And Wilson is the ONLY QB in NFL history to lose a playoff game in which he averaged at least 20 yards/completion -- there have been 39 all time in any game, most recently, Tony Romo in that crazy 51-48 loss to Denver in the 2013 season.
Russell Wilson, 2/1/15
Jeff Hostetler, 1/15/94 (29-23 loss to Oakland)
In total, they're 24-2.
And Wilson is the ONLY QB in NFL history to lose a playoff game in which he averaged at least 20 yards/completion -- there have been 39 all time in any game, most recently, Tony Romo in that crazy 51-48 loss to Denver in the 2013 season.
Russell Wilson is 10-0 versus Super Bowl-winning quarterbacks! 10-0! Seriously, that is AMAZI - oh wait...
I think he's also standing up for his own guys. Where the media seems to want to assign only blame on the play (to Carroll, Lockette, Bevell, etc.), Belichick def. wanted to make sure his players got the credit they deserved for executing it.DennyDoyle'sBoil said: