Ian Rapoport @RapSheet 36s36 seconds ago
With the Super Bowl over, the plan is for #Patriots LB Dont'a Hightower to have labrum surgery, I’m told. Played mostly with one arm.
Ian Rapoport @RapSheet 36s36 seconds ago
With the Super Bowl over, the plan is for #Patriots LB Dont'a Hightower to have labrum surgery, I’m told. Played mostly with one arm.
Here are the opening odds for all the NFL teams:
Seahawks: 6-to-1
Patriots: 7-1
Packers: 8-1
Broncos, Colts: 12-1
Cowboys: 18-1
Eagles: 25-1
Ravens, Steelers, 49ers, Saints, Lions: 30-1
Bengals: 35-1
Rams, Chiefs, Cardinals, Chargers, Giants: 40-1
Panthers, Dolphins: 45-1
Falcons, Texans: 50-1
Bears, Vikings: 60-1
Bills, Browns: 70-1
Jets: 125-1
Redskins: 140-1
Buccaneers: 200-1
Jaguars, Raiders, Titans: 300-1
Buffalo at 70-1? Sign me up.theapportioner said: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
Dan to Theo to Ben said:Best bet on that board are Cowgirls, Panthers, and us.
Everyone, run! It's the thread police!soxfan121 said:
Cut the shit. This isn't acceptable here.
SMU_Sox said: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.
Alas, in the end there was some disappointment for the pair as their side lost in a dramatic game.
EA Sports has been running Super Bowl simulations using Madden for more than a decade now with a respectable record of nine correct predictions and three false ones. However, this year it didn't just pick the winning team, it also foresaw that the Patriots would be trailing in the third quarter only for Tom Brady to deliver a game-clinching pass to Julian Edelman for a final score of 28-24. Yahoo Tech notes that the simulator also got some of the finer details right, including the first team to score, Brady's number of touchdowns — and was also only 27 yards off nailing the quarterback's total passing yardage.
E5 Yaz said: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?
wibi said:
I'd be interested to see how the Lane/Simon data overlays on the Avril data. The loss of Lane was much bigger to the pass defence but I've never seen anyone compare/contrast it to when Avril was on the field.
caminante11 said:From the article:
Um no, judging from their shirts.
E5 Yaz said: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?
Richard Sherman and the Seahawks thought they had Tom Brady knocked out well before New England's game-winning drive in the fourth quarter.
In an upcoming wired segment for Inside The NFL, which will also be shown on NFL Network at 9 p.m. ET Wednesday, the outspoken cornerback tells his teammates that Brady is "scared, his heart's gone. It's almost gone."
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: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.
Belichick brought up an interesting wrinkle that few who arent involved in game-day communication might have considered: With more media on the field for the end of the game to capture the postgame scene, sometimes communication systems that teams use can be affected.
Belichick mentioned Super Bowl XLII against the Giants, saying that happened to the Patriots at the end of that game.
All the TVs and everything go down on the field right at the end of the game, then your communication systems that were working OK during the game then break down at the end. That was the same thing that happened in '07. I thought that the signaling and the communication by [defensive coordinator] Matt Patricia and the defensive players, in order to get those subs on and off, was really good. We handled that part of it well.
Also talks about not taking a timeout.There has been a lot of criticism that I don't think is anywhere close to being deserved or founded," Belichick said Tuesday during his weekly appearance on sports radio WEEI in Boston. "That football team is very good, very well-coached, and Pete does a great job.
"Malcolm and Brandon [Browner], on that particular play, just made a great play. I think the criticism they've gotten for the game is totally out of line and by a lot of people who I don't think are anywhere near even qualified to be commenting on it."
Belichick also shared empathy for the Seahawks' heartbreak.
"I wouldn't be able to say enough about Seattle. They're a great football team, well-coached. They deserve so much credit for what they've done, and how well they've done it," he said on the program.
SMU_Sox said: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.
E5 Yaz said: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?
On the field, not injured.MalzoneExpress 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.
Avril got injured on the play that was Brady's 2nd pick so he was on the field for that one for sure.MalzoneExpress 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:On the field, not injured.
Byrdbrain said:Avril got injured on the play that was Brady's 2nd pick so he was on the field for that one for sure.
I obviously didn't verify the numbers but I don't doubt they are correct.
I also don't doubt they are meaningless.
Ah, right. Misread that.Papelbon's Poutine said:
He was playing for the LA Raiders. They lost that game to Buffalo.
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: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.