Printable View
I'm going back and forth on this one... leaning toward the Giants, but it looks like the public's on NY and yet the line has moved from +3 to +4? Giants are beat up on D, but they were last week too and looked fine against Chicago until that crazy field goal return for a TD. Jags have been a Jekyll and Hyde team, are coming off an ugly loss to the Texans, and have injury problems of their own. I no Garrard fan either.
I dunno... I like the G-men +4 but the line move seems fishy.
I like the Jaguars tonight. -3.5 (with the free half point from skybook).
Now, I'm just debating whether to make it a 2 or three unit play.
GOT DARN IT!!!
Brandon Lang is on the Jags tonight, which means that this will reduce this to a no play for me or a 1 unit play at highest.
DAMMIT!
Why don't you like Brandon Lang's picks? (I know nothing about him, besides that he's big-name tout.)
Ok, justfuckinggoogled him. Sounds like a huge douchebag. Does that mean you should fade (or lay off) his picks though?
He is a great person to fade. You NEVER wanna be on the same side with him.
Granted, this is one of his 'medium' plays only (and he sometimes does well with those), but yeah. The fact that he was on Denver (for '75 dimes') last night convinced me not to make a play on Denver.
Hmm, I don't get this logic at all. Fading individual cappers or touts doesn't seem like a good strategy, because if they're losing long-term, they either going busto or losing their whole clientele. And if they're a douchebag tout selling opposite picks to their clients, then how do you know which one pick you're getting?Quote:
Originally Posted by ensign_lee
The only way I can see it being right to fade this guy is that so many people follow him that they move the line?
Yeah; you'd think that, wouldn't you? But this guy's been around for awhile, losing long term for awhile.
So...