Most books need Rams

[pavyracer]

It will all come down to the script Goodell approves tonight on their final meeting with TV executives. If you can be a fly on the wall in that bunker you will win your bets.

[johnnyvegas13]

It will all come down to the script Goodell approves tonight on their final meeting with TV executives. If you can be a fly on the wall in that bunker you will win your bets.

The script is rams win

how gm plays out not scripted

[pilebuck13]

Rams better team everyone is taking shots at bengals ml

[Snowball]

My Cincy future is completely hedged out, and I even put extra on Rams ML when it went back to -190.
Plus Stafford's PY over and Beckham's RY over. The Bengals are outclassed in critical areas of the field.

This line should have gone to 5 or 5.5 on Rams. That it shifted back from -4.5 to -4 really does say the books
want Rams. I don't understand it except for the new public being attracted to a higher payoff.

Plan to keep an eye on late LM once the TV pundits everyone knows give their picks.

[AribaAriba]

How can u go against aaron donald and the other hall of famer von miller. Rams or nothing is the best bet imo.

[Eddy Munny]

This line should have gone to 5 or 5.5 on Rams. That it shifted back from -4.5 to -4 really does say the books
want Rams.

How do you figure they want the Rams if they're reluctant to move the line up?

If anything it suggests they don't want to entice anymore Bengals action, meaning they respect the Bengals money.

[Snowball]

How do you figure they want the Rams if they're reluctant to move the line up?

If anything it suggests they don't want to entice anymore Bengals action, meaning they respect the Bengals money.

it's because they took in unexpected Bengals bets, and had to move the line back down.

just added some *Team With Most Punts - Cincinnati -140

[Eddy Munny]

it's because they took in unexpected Bengals bets, and had to move the line back down.

just added some *Team With Most Punts - Cincinnati -140

Well in that case I'm not sure why you think the line should've moved to -5 or -5.5 but whatever.

[Fred The Hammer]

My Cincy future is completely hedged out, and I even put extra on Rams ML when it went back to -190.
Plus Stafford's PY over and Beckham's RY over. The Bengals are outclassed in critical areas of the field.

This line should have gone to 5 or 5.5 on Rams. That it shifted back from -4.5 to -4 really does say the books
want Rams. I don't understand it except for the new public being attracted to a higher payoff.

Plan to keep an eye on late LM once the TV pundits everyone knows give their picks.

IDK? I like Stafford but he'll go bad Favre on you and toss up a lollipop or two. That pick that SF dropped was ridiculously bad plus a pick in the red zone.

Make me the Cincy O-coord and they'd win the game. Go 5 wide and throw quick. Running for 2 yards won't help....maybe if you get a lead 2H. I think its a close game, but Cincy is feeling loose and free according to the news in LA. That makes them dangerous

[Fred The Hammer]

How can u go against aaron donald and the other hall of famer von miller. Rams or nothing is the best bet imo.

Rams are 15-5, but 9 times they couldn't cover -4. My Colts were all fkd up on the Oline in Week 2 and LA was all over Wentz, but they still only won by a fg. They didn't have OBJ or Von Miller then, but they don't put people away. They couldn't cover -4 vs SF in 3 games and I'd take Burrow and his weapons over Jimmy G and his.

Not saying I'm on Cincy, but don't understand SBR being so in love with LA here?

[Renegades]

IDK? I like Stafford but he'll go bad Favre on you and toss up a lollipop or two. That pick that SF dropped was ridiculously bad plus a pick in the red zone.

Make me the Cincy O-coord and they'd win the game. Go 5 wide and throw quick. Running for 2 yards won't help....maybe if you get a lead 2H. I think its a close game, but Cincy is feeling loose and free according to the news in LA. That makes them dangerous

I agree but cincy wont do this. Cincy has been ultra conservative in all three playoff games. They will run almost every first down and wait for Burrow to make a play on 3rd and long. Their offense has been nothing special in the playoffs. I think it back fires tmrw because Mixon isnt going to gash the rams on the ground.

[Fred The Hammer]

I agree but cincy wont do this. Cincy has been ultra conservative in all three playoff games. They will run almost every first down and wait for Burrow to make a play on 3rd and long. Their offense has been nothing special in the playoffs. I think it back fires tmrw because Mixon isnt going to gash the rams on the ground.

You're probably right, but they have firepower. I'd take Chase 1-on-1 on Ramsey who's a little overrated imo and the other guys can hurt LA too if Burrow has time. Everyone looks at Burrow vs Donald, but game probably comes down to LA's offense vs Cincy's defense. Akers might go off and LA wins going away, but if its close 2H then the pressure is on LA imo

[Fred The Hammer]

By the way MGM app has Akers First TD +900. I'll be on that for something.

[kursonik]

Not saying I'm on Cincy, but don't understand SBR being so in love with LA here?

Do you know why? Rams love play defense with 2 safety and Cincy's only real weapon is Burrow->Chase/Higgins and sometimes slot Burrow->Boyd (only Boyd because Uzomah with his MCL will be useless ). Rams won't blitz too much, because they don't want to leave any their CB 1-on-1, especially D.Williams vs. Chase/Higgins and they don't blitz because they have excellent passrush against weak OL. If Rams will force Cincy to play many 3&long, Donald/Miller on right side of Burrow will make MVP for one of them...

On the other side of the ball, the Rams will do theirs and the game is over - 30:10.

As usual, I don't bet on Super Bowl

[ChuckyTheGoat]

Is it true that the books need the Rams?

If so, will the Sunday move be toward Rams -3.5?

[pavyracer]

jjgold got the information that the books need Rams while cleaning horse stalls at the farm in Ocala.

[DJK]

Is it true that the books need the Rams?

If so, will the Sunday move be toward Rams -3.5?

David Payne Purdum@DavidPurdum·2h

Adam Pullen, assistant director of trading @CaesarsSports, feels good about the book's position on the Super Bowl. Noting the $9.5 million in Mattress Mack money-line bets on the Bengals, Pullen said, "We'll be rooting for that middle: Rams winning but not covering."

[ChuckyTheGoat]

Good stuff, DJK.

Makes sense. I really don't see the Rams winning easily:

1) The Ram defense has big names. But they've proven to be vulnerable. Any game plan has to figure out how to neutralize Donald.

2) Stafford is just not consistent enough to win easily. He makes errors, and I feel like that collar will be especially tight on Sunday.

[Fishhead]

jjgold got the information that the books need Rams while cleaning horse stalls at the farm in Ocala.

[Fishhead]

Is it true that the books need the Rams?

If so, will the Sunday move be toward Rams -3.5?

Circa at -4.5

[DJK]

It's all relative for the tweet below. If the ML bets on the Rams is only slightly more than the Bengals, then the books will lose for sure.

The break even point or slight win for the books is about 17/10 ratio of the Rams ML vs the Bengals ML.

I doubt there are 17 to 10 ratio of the Rams ML bets to the Bengals ML bets unless a ton more comes for the Rams by tomorrow.


David Payne Purdum@DavidPurdum·4h.

@CaesarsSports has taken more money-line bets on the Rams in 13 of the 14 jurisdictions in which it operates. The only state Caesars has attracted more bets on the Bengals to win straight-up? Louisiana.

[DJK]

I like Cousin Sal and guess who he picked? He thinks the Bengals win SU.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8j7rZp2d5Y

The other guy in the video, Clay Travis, is a CLOWN. He talks the same BS that's been said forever. The Rams D-line will overwhelm the Bengals' O-line. Whatever...

[DJK]

Another loser picked the Rams to cover.

Colin Cowherd
Pick: Rams 28-23

[lakerboy]

Aaron Donald is the most overrated player in the history of sports.

[lakerboy]

Not really, nothing out of the ordinary.

The Bengals are a team on a true Cinderella run, they've required a lot of breaks to get to this point, expecting the breaks to continue unabated is somewhat foolhardy.

The Rams dominated the Cards. They dominated the Bucs but lost their edge with a large lead and that complacency, combined with a rash of 2H turnovers, allowed the Bucs a miraculous tie late in the game. The 49ers did nothing against the Rams offensively and the Rams played a very sloppy half of football in the first 30 minutes. Shanny has LA's number but the right team won that game.

You have to portray things the way you feel fit. The rams were up big vs TB. That Bucs team was trash. They were missing big guys. Anyways the Rams barely won and that is because McVay is hesitant. He isn't a good coach. He can't close out. The Niners game sf should have won but that's all good. They couldn't close .

Cincinnati had a test first game. Long drought etc.

Tennessee was there for the taking and Cincinnati did just that.

Kc had that game in the bag. Zero chance Stafford would have come back in that spot.

Rams are at home. Why are they not-5.5/6?

[goduke]

Sounds like more book propaganda to get even more rams money. Between this and The mcvay story about him maybe not coaching if he wins a super bowl it’s just books trying to manipulate the markets

[DJK]

Well, Pinnacle's odd just went to Rams -4.5. If I had to guess, the US books will most likely follow or at least I'm hoping they will.

So much for asking for more Rams money.

[pavyracer]

The biggest mistake people make in the NFL is when they base their bets for Superbowl based on what happened in previous playoff games.

Remember Rams never played Bengals in the playoffs this year. So what did Rams did to Buccs or 49ers or what Bengals did to Titans and Chiefs has nothing to do with the Superbowl game as the teams didn't play each other.

The gameplan for each team is completely different. What matters is whether one of the two teams found a vulnerability in the other team that they can exploit like where the QB likes to throw the ball on certain situations so they can force a turnover. This is what is going to determine who wins. Not how the Rams beat the 49ers or how the Bengals beat the Chiefs.

[Eddy Munny]

You have to portray things the way you feel fit. The rams were up big vs TB. That Bucs team was trash. They were missing big guys. Anyways the Rams barely won and that is because McVay is hesitant. He isn't a good coach. He can't close out. The Niners game sf should have won but that's all good. They couldn't close .

Cincinnati had a test first game. Long drought etc.

Tennessee was there for the taking and Cincinnati did just that.

Kc had that game in the bag. Zero chance Stafford would have come back in that spot.

Rams are at home. Why are they not-5.5/6?

I don't see any major disagreement, other than the fact that you think the Niners should've won... I actually think Rams should've won by more. There were not one, but two drops late in the first half that resulted in a 10 point swing in SF's favor before intermission. Look at the stats, the Rams comfortably controlled time of possession and out-yarded SF by about 110. I know a lot of naysayers point out the Niners dropped an interception in the 4th quarter, which is true, but by no means would it have sealed the game.

Home field is less of a factor in a Super Bowl setting where visiting fans are expected to show in larger numbers than they would a regular season game. Travel is also less of a factor for the Bengals considering they have two weeks to get ready and acclimate themselves to the environment, time zone change, etc.

Rams also just won their last two games by a late field goal, which sticks in the minds of casual bettors and keeps the line suppressed, thinking anything over a field goal is value.

Four actually seems like an appropriate number when you consider all things... Maaybe a touch short, but nothing suggesting that books are taking a major position with the dog. It looks like action is fairly balanced.

[jjgold]

Rams money has to be coming in right?

[Alfie White]

I think it is left.

[Snowball]

Well in that case I'm not sure why you think the line should've moved to -5 or -5.5 but whatever.

It moved because those earlier bets were Rams heavy. Then the differential went the other way, to heavier on Bengals, now it has apparently stabilised, although there could be a late adjustment. This is all based on money inflows and risk assessment by the books. The role of the oddsmakers ends when the bets are coming in... unless there is significant news.

[Snowball]

Rams money has to be coming in right?

We would like to see that happen late in the final 45 minutes, but to be honest it would only be confirmation bias.
It could accelerate if the right TV personalities have an impact.

[ThaWoj]

Bengals wouldn't even be here if carr would have found the end zone, if tannehill didnt throw that pick, and if kc didn't totally and utterly collapse...yet here they are

[Snowball]

IDK? I like Stafford but he'll go bad Favre on you and toss up a lollipop or two. That pick that SF dropped was ridiculously bad plus a pick in the red zone.

Make me the Cincy O-coord and they'd win the game. Go 5 wide and throw quick. Running for 2 yards won't help....maybe if you get a lead 2H. I think its a close game, but Cincy is feeling loose and free according to the news in LA. That makes them dangerous

I'm not suggesting Cincy can't win. They very well may win, and Rams bettors should not blow money they can't afford to lose. That being said, the Rams can afford to make some mistakes and still come out on top, given their strengths. Cincy? not so much. Cincy has to do everything right. I'll fade that.