Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Football Forum (NFL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Robert F. Newton who wrote (11263)	1/10/2002 8:14:20 AM
From: Annette	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 45639

I have this funny feeling that the Rams won't make it... I like the idea of the Steelers in there...

To: Robert F. Newton who wrote (11263)	1/10/2002 9:59:32 AM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 45639

I have no feelings on any of the playoff games, so far. Honestly, the Patriots look pretty darn good to me. I am rooting for the Patriots and Steelers in the AFC, Niners and Rams in the AFC. Everyone talks about teams like GB and SF being the teams that can challenge the Rams, but Tampa is the team that has proven over the years that they can defend the Rams offense. The Rams are praying that Philly takes care of business. Records of opponents: 1. Detroit (.582) 2. Carolina (.574) 3. Indianapolis (.563) 4. Tampa Bay (.534) 5. (tied) Atlanta/Buffalo/Cleveland (.531) Atlanta played eight games against six playoff teams: two each against St. Louis (14-2) and San Francisco (12-4), and games against Chicago (13-3), Green Bay (12-4), New England (11-5) and Miami (11-5). Notice that the teams with the worst records had the toughest schedules. Another indicator of the parity that has taken over the NFL. Tom

To: Robert F. Newton who wrote (11263)	1/11/2002 2:46:16 PM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 45639

re: win totals In each of the last 3 seasons, 14 teams went over, 16 went under, and 1 was a push. Interestingly, if you had bet "under" on the win totals over 8, "over" on the win totals under 8, and abstained from the ones at 8, you would have gone 14-11, 17-9, and 21-9 (a 64% success rate). So, a brain dead strategy of systematically fading the pros would have worked pretty well. Of the win totals at 8 --- 3 went over, 8 went under, and 1 was a push --- biased to the downside for some reason. Tom