Calling the shot

[Riderx]

I thought it was going to be Balty beating KC in the CC. It's not.

Texans win s/u on Saturday & shock the world...

And Ravens host the CC

[Chamblin]

[Riderx]

This is crazy: This is the first home game off a bye for Detroit since 2017.

[Chamblin]

[BettinMan]

Very small sample, and both games were in WC round, but yeah not many playoff games have occurred with a line higher than -8 and total of 54+…

H and playoffs=1 and season>=2002 and total>=54 and line<-8

2-0 ats and 2-0 o/u

https://gimmethedog.com/NFL?q=H%20an...nd%20line%3C-8

Jayden Daniels is extremely impressive for a rookie, but Detroit’s entire team is extremely impressive. Not sure which way I’m gonna go on this one yet, but found that nugget and thought I’d share.

[BettinMan]

Another situation I was interested in…the Rams are going from west coast to east coast and on short rest…

A and playoffs=1 and season>=2002 and time zone = P and o:time zone = E and rest<6

Pacific time zone teams in the playoffs on less than 6 days rest, playing away vs. east coast opponent:

1-2 su and ats

https://gimmethedog.com/NFL?q=A%20an...and%20rest%3C6

All games occurred 2021 season or later (note this is 2002 season and later since I cannot trust playoff results on GTD prior to the 2002 season). Interesting thing is, the one team that bucked the trend was the Rams in the 2021 divisional round; this was the season where they went on to win the Super Bowl. They were a much more well-rounded team that year imo, especially on defense. The other note is that they played in Tampa Bay where it was a nice 54 degrees (thank you nflweather.com)…this game will be in Philly where it’s 35% chance of snow and 37 degrees.

The other interesting thing. The Eagles and Rams faced off in week 12 this year…there were no results in the database for a team that ran for over 300 yards in previous matchup while also holding its opponent to below 100 rushing yards.

Bump that number down to 250 though and you get one result. Again realllll small sample size here, but it’s active on two teams this week…

playoffs=1 and season>=2002 and P:RY>250 and Po:RY<100 and P:season=season

Since 2002, playoff teams who ran for over 250 yards in their previous same-season matchup against opponent, while also holding opponent below 100 rushing yards:

1-0 su and ats

https://gimmethedog.com/NFL?q=playof...eason%3Dseason

This qualifies both the Eagles and Ravens this week. Tough to go off a single game though, but rushing for over 250 and holding opponent below 100 is still impressive.

[BettinMan]

John, I see you are liking the Texans. I did find this…

HF and line<-7 and playoffs=1 and season>=2002 and P:HFW and P:RY>100 and Po:RY<100 and P:season=season

Since 2002, playoff home faves of more than a TD who won their previous same-season matchup as home faves while rushing for over 100 yards and holding opponent to below 100 rush yards in that game:

1-10-1 ats (8-3 su) and 2-8-1 o/u

https://gimmethedog.com/NFL?q=HF%20a...eason%3Dseason

Add that the previous same-season matchup the team had zero turnovers while their opponent had 2+

HF and line<-7 and playoffs=1 and season>=2002 and P:HFW and P:RY>100 and Po:RY<100 and P:TO=0 and Po:TO>=2 and P:season=season

0-3 ats (2-1 su)

https://gimmethedog.com/NFL?q=HF%20a...eason%3Dseason

I will say the Chiefs have been my kryptonite team this season. Every time I bet on them, they failed to cover. Every time I bet against them, they covered. Just goes that way sometimes haha.

Another thing I’ll say, even tho these results look good, I don’t like that I can’t find a good discernible reason for them. If a team rushes for over 100 and holds their opponent below 100 in the prev same-season matchup, and plays turnover free while forcing 2+…why would that make them not play well enough in the next matchup?

I guess the answer would be that the line is inflated in the next matchup. And that does make sense since the prev matchup the line was Chiefs -3.5, now it’s -8.5. The Texans only lost by 8 that game while losing the turnover battle 0-2, so even if they lose the turnover battle again they could still cover that inflated number. If they don’t, who knows maybe they can win the game. Ok maybe I’ve talked myself into it now haha.

[Michelangelo]

Very small sample, and both games were in WC round, but yeah not many playoff games have occurred with a line higher than -8 and total of 54+…

H and playoffs=1 and season>=2002 and total>=54 and line<-8

2-0 ats and 2-0 o/u

https://gimmethedog.com/NFL?q=H%20an...nd%20line%3C-8

Jayden Daniels is extremely impressive for a rookie, but Detroit’s entire team is extremely impressive. Not sure which way I’m gonna go on this one yet, but found that nugget and thought I’d share.

Is that supposed to read > -8 BM?

THanks

[Michelangelo]

Another situation I was interested in…the Rams are going from west coast to east coast and on short rest…

A and playoffs=1 and season>=2002 and time zone = P and o:time zone = E and rest<6

Pacific time zone teams in the playoffs on less than 6 days rest, playing away vs. east coast opponent:

1-2 su and ats

https://gimmethedog.com/NFL?q=A%20an...and%20rest%3C6

All games occurred 2021 season or later (note this is 2002 season and later since I cannot trust playoff results on GTD prior to the 2002 season). Interesting thing is, the one team that bucked the trend was the Rams in the 2021 divisional round; this was the season where they went on to win the Super Bowl. They were a much more well-rounded team that year imo, especially on defense. The other note is that they played in Tampa Bay where it was a nice 54 degrees (thank you nflweather.com)…this game will be in Philly where it’s 35% chance of snow and 37 degrees.

The other interesting thing. The Eagles and Rams faced off in week 12 this year…there were no results in the database for a team that ran for over 300 yards in previous matchup while also holding its opponent to below 100 rushing yards.

Bump that number down to 250 though and you get one result. Again realllll small sample size here, but it’s active on two teams this week…

playoffs=1 and season>=2002 and P:RY>250 and Po:RY<100 and P:season=season

Since 2002, playoff teams who ran for over 250 yards in their previous same-season matchup against opponent, while also holding opponent below 100 rushing yards:

1-0 su and ats

https://gimmethedog.com/NFL?q=playof...eason%3Dseason

This qualifies both the Eagles and Ravens this week. Tough to go off a single game though, but rushing for over 250 and holding opponent below 100 is still impressive.

Can you query this for over 200 and under 100, BM?

Thanks

[Michelangelo]

John, I see you are liking the Texans. I did find this…

HF and line<-7 and playoffs=1 and season>=2002 and P:HFW and P:RY>100 and Po:RY<100 and P:season=season

Since 2002, playoff home faves of more than a TD who won their previous same-season matchup as home faves while rushing for over 100 yards and holding opponent to below 100 rush yards in that game:

1-10-1 ats (8-3 su) and 2-8-1 o/u

https://gimmethedog.com/NFL?q=HF%20a...eason%3Dseason

Add that the previous same-season matchup the team had zero turnovers while their opponent had 2+

HF and line<-7 and playoffs=1 and season>=2002 and P:HFW and P:RY>100 and Po:RY<100 and P:TO=0 and Po:TO>=2 and P:season=season

0-3 ats (2-1 su)

https://gimmethedog.com/NFL?q=HF%20a...eason%3Dseason

I will say the Chiefs have been my kryptonite team this season. Every time I bet on them, they failed to cover. Every time I bet against them, they covered. Just goes that way sometimes haha.

Another thing I’ll say, even tho these results look good, I don’t like that I can’t find a good discernible reason for them. If a team rushes for over 100 and holds their opponent below 100 in the prev same-season matchup, and plays turnover free while forcing 2+…why would that make them not play well enough in the next matchup?

I guess the answer would be that the line is inflated in the next matchup. And that does make sense since the prev matchup the line was Chiefs -3.5, now it’s -8.5. The Texans only lost by 8 that game while losing the turnover battle 0-2, so even if they lose the turnover battle again they could still cover that inflated number. If they don’t, who knows maybe they can win the game. Ok maybe I’ve talked myself into it now haha.

Like this one a lot. Thanks.

[BettinMan]

Is that supposed to read > -8 BM?

THanks

Hey Mich, no. It seems counterintuitive to say “less than” when you’re talking about a bigger favorite, but because it’s a negative number, “less than” -8 to the database means any fave -8.5 or more to us.

So line<-8 means any fave -8.5, -9, -9.5, -10 etc.

———

Here’s the results of 200 rush yards instead of 250…

playoffs=1 and season>=2002 and P:RY>200 and Po:RY<100 and P:season=season

6-9 su and ats, 10-4-1 o/u

https://gimmethedog.com/NFL?q=playof...eason%3Dseason

Interesting results given the logic…you’d think a team that dominated the run game on both sides like that would have a better su and ats record in the next matchup, but this trend includes all lines fave and dog and the avg line is +2.03.

Make the team a fave and it becomes

F and playoffs=1 and season>=2002 and P:RY>200 and Po:RY<100 and P:season=season

4-1 su, 3-2 ats and 3-1-1 o/u

https://gimmethedog.com/NFL?q=F%20an...eason%3Dseason

[Riderx]

Hey Justin & Jim, good to see others contributing & sharing. Here is something direct & to the point. Sit back for a second & look at the Ravens last 4-5 scores: Dominating!!!

I pointed out awhile back that Vegas was telling us already who was going to the SB in the AFC...the Ravens. And mark my words in this thread that when they do there will be a big stink in the Big Easy about the Ravens winning the SB every 12 years...in '00, '12 & now 24. But the problem is all of those other teams lost the SB, so the Ravens are going to the SB but the NFC wins...whoever it is that represents, hopefully the Lions.

But for now, look at this: teams that have avg'd more than 27pts & allowed less than 15 over a 4-game span, team is off a playoff game & won 4+ in a row, vs a conf opp on Sunday not off a bye (eliminating div rd games off a bye):

tA(points@team, N=4)>27 and tA(o:points@team, N=4)<15 and p:playoffs=1 and op:week=week-1 and C and streak>=4 and day=Sunday

5-0 s/u & ats...home or away, any line dog or fav

All AFC games went Over the total...with the teams scoring 35, 36 & 34...Balty Over TT

Caveat: All 5 games were CC games because they were before '20 when we went to 7 seeeds & xtra WC games. (All 5 won the SB)

but I actually have a system that also has this game going to Overtime

This game may be an instant classic & one of the best games we've seen all year, at least I hope so.

[dollars]

Good work everyone, I don't want to see KC in the SB. Want to see some new faces...

[Riderx]

Good work everyone, I don't want to see KC in the SB. Want to see some new faces...

You & me both, man. You & me both...

[BT]

Hey Mich, no. It seems counterintuitive to say “less than” when you’re talking about a bigger favorite, but because it’s a negative number, “less than” -8 to the database means any fave -8.5 or more to us.

So line<-8 means any fave -8.5, -9, -9.5, -10 etc.

I'm sorry ... that is just stupid!!! J/K


Thanks for sharing all of this stuff guys. Always appreciated. And beyond the effort and gems that are in these threads, it's also amazing to be able to come on this site and find some great threads/info to read. Most of us log on on game day and post our plays and/or opinions. I always love when I check the site and there is new info to read on a Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday!! So thanks for the entertainment and education value as well as the actual post itself!! Usually 7 days a week!! Helps the week get to game day faster.