Don't Forget...

[dave T]

...the Patriots are quite near a DOUBLE 30-10 PEAK situation (as were the Bears prior to playing at Arizona).

While not technically a play, I would be wary of going with the Pats this week, and certainly not as a strong play.

Used with discretion, you can "fudge" a little with this system. This is a decent place to fudge since they play a strong team (the Colts) and since, while not scoring 30> vs the Bills two weeks ago, they did hold them to six points and win by 22.

Really tough to go against Pats I admit, especially at home. But I think the Colts are the play, although not a strong one. If the Pats had met the criteria fully, this would be a huge play as it always the case when this system comes up.

gl,
dave

[AlexTheGreat]

Thanks Dave for the info.

What casinoes are open in the gulf coast?
We were thinking about going down there for the holidays.

[Pancho-3]

Dave - You refer to Patriots being near a 30-10 Peak Situation, Can you explain what you mean by a 30-10 situation.
Thank you in advance

[molta02]

I hear what you're saying, but this is the one team that never really falls for trap games, look aheads, let downs, sandwich games, etc.

but then again I'm biased.

[dave T]

Molta,

Technically the Patriots do not meet the specific criteria. When a team does meet that criteria, the best teams in NFL history have "faltered" at that point in the face of a million reasons why they wouldn't. (see Bears vs Cardinals 20006)

Pancho,

GO AGAINST AN NFL TEAM THAT SCORED 30 OR MORE IN EACH OF THEIR LAST TWO GAMES AND ALLOWED TEN OR LESS IN THOSE SAME TWO GAMES...IF...THEY ARE NOW PLAYING OUTSIDE OF THEIR DIVISON.

gl,
dave

[DIRK]

pats only favored by 3 though.

[dave T]

Throw everything else out the window, including what the line is....IF...the team meets the criteria. The Pats do NOT meet the criteria in full, and therefore, technically, are not in the go against role. But they are very close to it, and for that reason, I would be careful to either not go with the Pats or, if you must, keep it light imo

(see Bal @ CLE, Chi @ MIN, and Sdg @ BAL; all of these were "nearly dbl 30-10 peaks" and all three failed to cover)

gl,
dave