Two Profitable NFL Datasets For This Sunday

Over the past 6 seasons, NFL playoff teams (based on previous season) that have played an away conference game against non-playoff opponents have played 100-69-4, with a coverage ratio of 59% and an ROI of Corresponds to 17%. This Sunday there are these statistics in the form of two matches that also match a basic eye test.

Philadelphia Eagles vs. Washington Redskins

Though the Eagles have had some tough times this season and now have a chance to get thinner at WR than they are. Alshon Jeffery lost the season last week when he defeated the NY Giants. Still, with the Redskins scoring last, overtaking yards and possession, and the Eagles playing for their playoffs running the rest of the season every week, the -4.5 value seems reasonable enough, though I personally prefer to play this bet as a Moneyline bet, as the Eagles have had significant injury problems over the past three weeks and Washington’s game has improved. It was 1: 2 at that time. The only loss was a bitter blow to the Packers last week.

New England Patriots vs. Cincinnati Bengals

With a lot of attention this week for the Patriots’ Spygate 2.0, the real issue is that New England is only a 10-point favorite over a Bengals team that has won only one game all season. And while it’s true that New England has had quite a few fights this season, especially against the 1: 4 margin against the last 5, this seems to be a great opportunity to neglect the team of the decade. The patriots not only occupy eighth place in the classification, ninth place in passing and fourth place in possession of the ball (the Bengals occupy 31st, 18th and 26th place in the same statistics), but should also bring with them a defense To prove it is the “overrated” talk after defeats against Kansas City and Houston. And although the spot has been profitable for the entire game in the past, since New England was bet in the first half or downgraded from -10 to the all-important -3, both seem equally attractive.

Play it safe and good luck!

Leave a Reply