PDA

View Full Version : Peter King's Playoff Formula



buzmeg
07-26-2010, 10:32 AM
Peter King's MMQB is back from vacation. In his first article he us gives this to ponder:

Optimism everywhere. Rightfully so. The last three Super Bowl winners, in the year prior to winning it all, won 8, 10 and 8 games. (The Giants, Steelers and Saints managed that trifecta.) That means one of the following teams -- winners of between 8 and 10 games last year -- should feel very, very good entering training camp this week:

1. New England (10 wins).
2. New York Jets (9).
3. Cincinnati (10).
4. Baltimore (9).
5. Pittsburgh (9).
6. Houston (9).
7. Tennessee (8).
8. Denver (8).
9. New York Giants (8).
10. Atlanta (9).
11. Carolina (8).
12. Arizona (10).
13. San Francisco (8).

That's 41 percent of the league with the same shot the past three Super Bowl winners had entering the year they won it. Take that to Vegas, put $20 on each team and, hey, you should make more than $260.


So who's in and who's NOT?

Cris Collinsworth
07-26-2010, 10:42 AM
The team I keep coming back to is the Giants. There is no way that their running game and defense could be that bad again. The only major issue I have with the Giants is replacing Antonio Pierce. The Raiders killed them taking Rolando McClain, the linebacker from Alabama.

giantsfan97
07-26-2010, 11:08 AM
Cris (or any of our experts) any thoughts on the Giants signing Keith Bulluck the other day?

TheLinc
07-26-2010, 11:20 AM
The team I keep coming back to is the Giants. There is no way that their running game and defense could be that bad again. The only major issue I have with the Giants is replacing Antonio Pierce. The Raiders killed them taking Rolando McClain, the linebacker from Alabama.

True, but they didn't exactly help themselves by picking JPP either. Seemed like a lot of question marks for such a high pick.

Look at the AFC North representing well. Rough luck, Cleveland. Have to believe it's still Cincy's division though, despite Baltimore's additions. I think I'm more interest in the NFC South though, who's going to be challenging (or nipping at?) the Saints this year. Who's job is on the line if they don't make the turn?

cobber66
07-26-2010, 12:56 PM
Optimism everywhere. Rightfully so. The last three Super Bowl winners, in the year prior to winning it all, won 8, 10 and 8 games. (The Giants, Steelers and Saints managed that trifecta.) That means one of the following teams -- winners of between 8 and 10 games last year -- should feel very, very good entering training camp this week:

This is ridiculous logic, although I will say all too common among sports fans. Just because the last three Super Bowl winners had 8 or 10 wins the year before means that teams that were mediocre last year have a better shot at winning the Super Bowl? Please tell me that this veteran NFL "insider" has more to offer us than just this logic. With all due respect to his longevity, I've never found anything he says to be very useful. Just because you know all these people in the league doesn't mean you understand what's going on inside it, and to me Peter King either doesn't know or won't tell us anything beyond what most fans can already see.

cobber66
07-26-2010, 12:58 PM
That's 41 percent of the league with the same shot the past three Super Bowl winners had entering the year they won it. Take that to Vegas, put $20 on each team and, hey, you should make more than $260.

Yeah, that's solid betting advice. Hey, throw money at all these teams that are just average, and you'll win!!!

theshow47
07-26-2010, 01:15 PM
Please tell me that this veteran NFL "insider" has more to offer us than just this logic. With all due respect to his longevity, I've never found anything he says to be very useful. Just because you know all these people in the league doesn't mean you understand what's going on inside it, and to me Peter King either doesn't know or won't tell us anything beyond what most fans can already see.

Everytime I read MMQB I lose more and more respect for King. When is the last time he made an observation that drew your attention to a matchup that wasnt wide spread knowledge. Sorry to the 12 Peter King fans still alive but saying things like "Limiting turnovers will be the key to tonights matchup" is not insight, thats Cris Carter type of material

GoBigOrGoHome
07-26-2010, 02:07 PM
Everytime I read MMQB I lose more and more respect for King. When is the last time he made an observation that drew your attention to a matchup that wasnt wide spread knowledge. Sorry to the 12 Peter King fans still alive but saying things like "Limiting turnovers will be the key to tonights matchup" is not insight, thats Cris Carter type of material

So, at some point you actually had some respect for King? Interesting...

GBPKS
07-26-2010, 02:28 PM
Yeah, that's solid betting advice. Hey, throw money at all these teams that are just average, and you'll win!!!

Actually, it's a pretty decent strategy. One thing my buddies did last year was at the beginning of the season put together some money and build a portfolio of futures for winning the Super Bowl. The Saints were 20-1 to win the Super Bowl at the beginning of the year which was exceptional value.

I ended up putting money on the Jags, Giants, Ravens, Packers, Colts, and Saints (all at 12-1 or better) - and a Colts/Saints Super Bowl meant that the portfolio was a guaranteed winner (about 100% return on investment).

It is difficult to make money betting on the favorites (I don't remember what the Pats were heading into the season last year but I remember it being pretty ridiculous). This year, already I managed to find a Falcons line at 40-1 in Vegas right after the Super Bowl and I snapped that up in a heartbeat.

Pruitt
07-26-2010, 03:59 PM
Yeah, that's solid betting advice. Hey, throw money at all these teams that are just average, and you'll win!!!

Hilarious! Betting strategies like that are what built Vegas.

MattBer2c
07-26-2010, 04:30 PM
Save your $20 and don't bet on the Cardinals. They won 10 games, but they had Warner playing. They're gonna need a year or two to figure things out.

FessJL0861
07-26-2010, 04:52 PM
Save your $20 and don't bet on the Cardinals. They won 10 games, but they had Warner playing. They're gonna need a year or two to figure things out.

That is pretty generous with the Cards. I think those playoff formulas are about as scattershot as they come. It all comes back to the sniff test. If it sounds wrong, it probably is.

Colts01
07-26-2010, 07:03 PM
wow you could just do parlay bets,if gambling were legal that is

cobber66
07-26-2010, 10:35 PM
Hilarious! Betting strategies like that are what built Vegas.

I would go even farther and say that futures and prop betting are what Vegas makes their money on!

Chilly
07-27-2010, 03:45 AM
Going back to what Cris said about the Giants/McClain...

After watching the Giants last year, the defense looked extremely susceptible to the big play. I don't see how removing Pierce from the equation or even adding Rolle will patch up that major leak. And while Manning and [the other] Steve Smith improved immensely, I don't think it is a formidable enough offense to make up for what I see as a mediocre defense on the other side. All that being added to the fact that the division will not offer any free-bies, I think the Giants are a fringe playoff team at best.

But that's just my logic--which is nothing compared to that of Peter King...

Docta
07-27-2010, 04:48 AM
wow you could just do parlay bets,if gambling were legal that is
There'd be no chance of winning with a parlay. To win a parlay, every bet would have to win, and only 1 could win with this.

Even for a straight bet, I think this is too risky. It was just a coincidence with the last 3 teams.

giantsfan97
07-27-2010, 10:13 AM
I think the Giants are a fringe playoff team at best.
I think that's about what they deserve expectations-wise. To me, their whole season depends on if they can stay relatively healthy. We had 2 bad safeties last year, if healthy this year, we have 2 good ones. Ahmad Bradshaw played most of the season with broken bones in both feet. Both feet. That's the tip of the iceberg, and of course everyone has injuries, I think the Giants were hit worse than most (an easy excuse I know) so it's really hard to guess how good or bad they will be.

brauneyz
07-27-2010, 11:26 AM
It all comes back to the sniff test. If it sounds wrong, it probably is.

I'm impressed that you can smell sounds.

TheLinc
07-27-2010, 11:26 AM
I think that's about what they deserve expectations-wise. To me, their whole season depends on if they can stay relatively healthy. We had 2 bad safeties last year, if healthy this year, we have 2 good ones. Ahmad Bradshaw played most of the season with broken bones in both feet. Both feet. That's the tip of the iceberg, and of course everyone has injuries, I think the Giants were hit worse than most (an easy excuse I know) so it's really hard to guess how good or bad they will be.

It's an easy cop-out, but it still explains why they dropped off so significantly halfway through the season. There's only so much you can do when your best players aren't on the field, excuses be damned.

Bengals1181
07-27-2010, 11:54 AM
1. New England (10 wins).
2. New York Jets (9).
3. Cincinnati (10).
4. Baltimore (9).


There's excellent odds that the AFC representative will be one of those 4, along with the Colts.

kotar44
07-27-2010, 12:09 PM
Past results are no indication of future performance, or at least thats what my bookie keeps telling me...how is it possible for someone to have been around the league for so long, and with so many inside contacts to NEVER, EVER have anything relevant to say about football??? You'd think just by dumb luck King would stumble across a good story at least once per season, but he defies expectations year after year. Find me a sports book that will let me bet on the over/under for inane and useless comments by a journalist, and thats a bet I'll take. Oh yea, go Giants, I laid down $500 my last trip to LV

TheLinc
07-27-2010, 12:13 PM
There's excellent odds that the AFC representative will be one of those 4, along with the Colts.

Yeah that's one of a few gripes, is that winning more than 10 games is somehow a detriment?

I think I'm one of the few who still enjoys Peter King, but anyone espousing a 'playoff formula' picked the wrong week to quit huffing paint. If there was ever an unpredictable scenario, it's the NFL playoffs. Every year we're constantly bombarded by the various wild card scenarios and how the last game of the season inevitably determines so much, doubly so now that the NFL is pushing to make it a divisional game.

I'll examine his rationale when I'm hungover.

buzmeg
07-27-2010, 07:52 PM
Actually, it's a pretty decent strategy. One thing my buddies did last year was at the beginning of the season put together some money and build a portfolio of futures for winning the Super Bowl. The Saints were 20-1 to win the Super Bowl at the beginning of the year which was exceptional value.

I ended up putting money on the Jags, Giants, Ravens, Packers, Colts, and Saints (all at 12-1 or better) - and a Colts/Saints Super Bowl meant that the portfolio was a guaranteed winner (about 100% return on investment).

It is difficult to make money betting on the favorites (I don't remember what the Pats were heading into the season last year but I remember it being pretty ridiculous). This year, already I managed to find a Falcons line at 40-1 in Vegas right after the Super Bowl and I snapped that up in a heartbeat.

Perter King thanks you! :)

buzmeg
07-27-2010, 07:55 PM
Andy, I caught the Perter King error but didn't know how to edit the title line.

Is it admin only?