Chargers mojo deprived
Sometime between the Cowboys' atrocious loss to the Eagles and the Halloween Monday Night game, I asked Black Francis if he'd rather see San Diego implode during the regular season and somehow lose their playoff spot to the Chiefs or Raiders, or see them cruise to a two seed, then choke away their home field advantage in the opening round of the playoffs.
Frank mumbled back something incoherent as he choked down some Tribulus and asked me if I wanted any. I think he was still recovering from the latest Dallas debacle.
"It'll help your mojo, bro!"
Who could pass that up? The powdered capsules were thrown into a package of supplements Frank had mail-ordered. When you order enough protein, creatine, HGH, etc, male-enhancement is just part of the, er...package. I digress.
Why do I hate the Chargers? Hate is too strong of a word, but I must admit I enjoy watching them lose. There is something comforting about choke-artists...as long as you aren't rooting for them. I may not be able to set my watch to the Charger choke, but I know it's coming. Whether they die by a thousand tiny cuts (or 7 to 9 regular season losses, see 2010, 2005) or in a home playoff game shocker (2009, 2006, 2004), ultimately their fate is total humiliation.* In the name of full disclosure, San Diego managed to win two playoff games in 2007, and one more in 2008... before losing to the unbeaten Pats, and the Super Bowl bound Steelers. I guess not total humiliation.
Monday's 23-20 OT loss to the Chiefs may not indicate what is in store for the Chargers the rest of the season (doom and disappointment), but it sure feels that way. San Diego has been shaky all year. Running backs Ryan Matthews and Mike Tolbert take turns getting hurt, tight end Antonio Gates has missed most of the season, and quarterback Phillip Rivers is shooting for some kind of interception record. This game just further exposed the shakiness. Have I mentioned that Norv Turner is still their head coach? Norv Turner is still their head coach.
In all likelihood, the Chargers probably fall somewhere in between my two scenarios, limping to a 10-6 record and a 3 or 4 seed. At that point, I'd probably pick them to lose to the Ravens or Steelers, but possibly beat the Jets or Bills...or Bengals. If they're still hanging around the next week, I'll almost certainly pick against them, unless they give me some really good reasons not to.
I probably wouldn't have had as much fun rooting against the Chargers were I not holed up in a country where bettting on sports is illegal. (Afghanistan, not America.) If I'd been in the U.S., where sports betting is illegal, but is also considerably easier to do, I'd probably have some $$ on San Diego to win their division, since the AFC West has been notoriously weak, and since they seemed like a shoe-in.
On the other hand, that wouldn't have stopped me from betting CHIEFS(+3)over chargers, so maybe I'd have had even more fun. At least it would have made up for cowboys(+3.5)over EAGLES. That game didn't go quite as well. I was much closer to going 0-2 than 2-0 this week. Of course, if I was somewhere it was easier to gamble, I would have had more than two picks. It's much harder to stay motivated when you can't bet.
All this is to say that I am pretty rusty right now, and that you probably shouldn't take my gambling advice, aside from the part where I tell you not to take my gambling advice. Having said that, here is my week nine gambling advice. Recommendations are in bold print.
I'm way more excited about Denver at Oakland than I should be. The Broncos are terrible, and the Raiders have semi-retired Carson Palmer at quarterback and recently injured Daren McFadden at running back. This makes the game about impossible to handicap, despite which I managed to guess the pointspread within one point. The line is Oakland(-7) and I guessed (-6). My initial assumtion was that this meant McFadden would play, but it's possible that Vegas just thinks Tim Tebow sucks that badly.
Last week the press tried to hype Lions at Broncos as good (the genuflecting Tim Tebow) vs. evil (dirty Ndamakong Suh). This is silly, but as a long-suffering Lions fan, I relish the prospect of the Lions as evil, intimidating bullies, rather than perrennial doormats. Detroit's evil antics vs. Denver included repeated sacks of Tebow, at least one of which was followed by a "Tebow." Ever since Timmy was seen on the ground praying for an accurate field goal attempt at the end of the Dolphin game, random, inexplicable prayer has been dubbed a "Tebow," and the Lions made sure to mix this into their sack celebrations.
Thankfully, the Lions have a bye this week, so you don't need to listen to me prattle on about them...for now. Not that I shouldn't celebrate a couple of winning months, after five decades of futility or anything, but this week the Broncos go to Oakland, and the Raiders are a slam dunk if the media want to keep this good vs. evil thing alive. They pretty much had a monopoly on evil for a while.
The other big storyline is the debate between those who think Tebow sucks, and those who don't watch the games. I feel like the Broncos need to win this one to keep the debate alive. Or lose by less than 38 points.
Of course, there are some things Timmy does quite well, like running...or praying...sometimes even winning, and rather dramatically at that. These just aren't typical QB measurables, like throwing for big yards and a high completion percentage.
You'll hear people talk about a quarterback's intangibles when they can't figure out how he wins, despite his evident lack of talent. I think we need another word for Timmy, though. How about "anti-tangibles"? Anti-tangibles would be what helps Timmy win despite his very tangible shortcomings. Those things we can put our finger on, like his incredibly slow wind up, his terrible mechanics, and his inaccuracy. If you'd like another example, I think Big Ben had some anti-tangibles going in that Super Bowl win over the Seahawks. Check his stat line from that game if you don't remember watching it.
Anyway, I'm too scared to bet this game if I could, but I think the NFL will be happier if Tebow wins. Not that they would rig games or anything.... broncos(+8)over OAKLAND (yeah, the line moved in the last bit.) Don't bet this game, especially if you don't know who is playing for the Raiders, but not even God gives Tim Tebow 8 points.
What am I saying? Of course he does...especially if Darren McFadden plays. Lets move on.
BUFFALO(-1.5)over nyjets. I probably would bet this one, though off a bye Rex Ryan may have some interesting wrinkles for his team. The Jets probably should be a better team than the Bills, but are they right now? Wagers on this week's games aren't settled according to who will be better seven months from now. Just figure out who is better now, or maybe seven days from now.
san francisco(-3.5)over WASHINGTON. Last year everyone kept pointing at the 'Niners as the talented team who could break out at any time. This year they are breaking out. Hopefully you didn't blow too much betting against them last year.
On the other hand, living in the moment when gambling has it's limitations as well. Can you believe the Redskins were the money favorite to win the NFC East within the last month? Me neither. Their ultimate collapse is inherently more inevitable, because it will happen much sooner--in a given year, that is. This year it's already happening.
Are the Redskins so bad they get points at home from West Coast teams? Um...pretty much!
PITTSBURGH(-3.5)over baltimore. The Ravens took it upon themselves to run up the score on the Steelers opening day. The betting public loves Pittsburgh to dominate the rematch, and so do I, though if you wanted to argue that the Steelers will have a big letdown after a tough win over the Patriots, I might buy it....No I wouldn't. This is Steelers-Ravens. Both of these teams know they will be in a dogfight.
tampa bay(+8)over NEW ORLEANS The Bucs have played the Saints tough of late, and New Orleans can play some pretty crappy games for such a good team. Their loss to the Rams last week makes me more inclined to understand how they were seven point dogs to the Colts back in the Super Bowl, a line I strongly disagreed with at the time. Find out if LGBT is healthy though before you risk any coin.**
nygiants(+9)over NEWENGLAND. The Pats tend to torch whoever they play coming off a loss, but I can't give points like that when my defense is as bad as the Pats. Victor Cruz, Hakeem Nicks, and Mario Manningham will run wild in the Pat secondary. I'd take my chances on the Giants here. You'll probably want to know Ahmad Bradshaw's health before you bet this one though.
green bay(-4)over SAN DIEGO. As long as the Chargers continue to play like shit, this line is reasonable. And I wouldn't feel right taking the Chargers this soon after talking all that trash. Not when I can ride their losing streak to the bottom.
On the other hand, San Diego is capable of staying with a team like the Packers (their talent, after all, is what makes their ultimate failures so enticing and epic), and the Packers have a history of letting teams back into game. I don't like to pick teams based on potential, though.
chicago(+7)over PHILADELPHIA The Eagles are among the most schizoid teams in the league right now. I have no idea if they will come to play, or not. I don't think the Eagles can really stop Matt Forte, but I expect they will beat the crap out of Jay Cutler, and this could lead to mistakes. Mistakes worse than dumping Kristen Cavallari? Perhaps. Mistakes worse than taking her back? Probably. In fact, I recommend you tread extremely lightly when even considering betting a quarterback with a reality show girlfriend. QB needs a clear head. That means no reality skanks, and no Tribulus, at least not without a doctor's supervision.
*Black Francis enjoys the Chargers humiliation because it makes him feel better about being a Cowboys fan.
**LaGarrette Blount, not Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual and Transgender. If BenJarvis Green-Ellis can be BJGE, or the Law Firm, Blount needs a catchy nickname too. As for it being gay-friendly, why the hell not? Welcome to the 21st Century.
Frank mumbled back something incoherent as he choked down some Tribulus and asked me if I wanted any. I think he was still recovering from the latest Dallas debacle.
"It'll help your mojo, bro!"
Who could pass that up? The powdered capsules were thrown into a package of supplements Frank had mail-ordered. When you order enough protein, creatine, HGH, etc, male-enhancement is just part of the, er...package. I digress.
Why do I hate the Chargers? Hate is too strong of a word, but I must admit I enjoy watching them lose. There is something comforting about choke-artists...as long as you aren't rooting for them. I may not be able to set my watch to the Charger choke, but I know it's coming. Whether they die by a thousand tiny cuts (or 7 to 9 regular season losses, see 2010, 2005) or in a home playoff game shocker (2009, 2006, 2004), ultimately their fate is total humiliation.* In the name of full disclosure, San Diego managed to win two playoff games in 2007, and one more in 2008... before losing to the unbeaten Pats, and the Super Bowl bound Steelers. I guess not total humiliation.
Monday's 23-20 OT loss to the Chiefs may not indicate what is in store for the Chargers the rest of the season (doom and disappointment), but it sure feels that way. San Diego has been shaky all year. Running backs Ryan Matthews and Mike Tolbert take turns getting hurt, tight end Antonio Gates has missed most of the season, and quarterback Phillip Rivers is shooting for some kind of interception record. This game just further exposed the shakiness. Have I mentioned that Norv Turner is still their head coach? Norv Turner is still their head coach.
In all likelihood, the Chargers probably fall somewhere in between my two scenarios, limping to a 10-6 record and a 3 or 4 seed. At that point, I'd probably pick them to lose to the Ravens or Steelers, but possibly beat the Jets or Bills...or Bengals. If they're still hanging around the next week, I'll almost certainly pick against them, unless they give me some really good reasons not to.
I probably wouldn't have had as much fun rooting against the Chargers were I not holed up in a country where bettting on sports is illegal. (Afghanistan, not America.) If I'd been in the U.S., where sports betting is illegal, but is also considerably easier to do, I'd probably have some $$ on San Diego to win their division, since the AFC West has been notoriously weak, and since they seemed like a shoe-in.
On the other hand, that wouldn't have stopped me from betting CHIEFS(+3)over chargers, so maybe I'd have had even more fun. At least it would have made up for cowboys(+3.5)over EAGLES. That game didn't go quite as well. I was much closer to going 0-2 than 2-0 this week. Of course, if I was somewhere it was easier to gamble, I would have had more than two picks. It's much harder to stay motivated when you can't bet.
All this is to say that I am pretty rusty right now, and that you probably shouldn't take my gambling advice, aside from the part where I tell you not to take my gambling advice. Having said that, here is my week nine gambling advice. Recommendations are in bold print.
I'm way more excited about Denver at Oakland than I should be. The Broncos are terrible, and the Raiders have semi-retired Carson Palmer at quarterback and recently injured Daren McFadden at running back. This makes the game about impossible to handicap, despite which I managed to guess the pointspread within one point. The line is Oakland(-7) and I guessed (-6). My initial assumtion was that this meant McFadden would play, but it's possible that Vegas just thinks Tim Tebow sucks that badly.
Last week the press tried to hype Lions at Broncos as good (the genuflecting Tim Tebow) vs. evil (dirty Ndamakong Suh). This is silly, but as a long-suffering Lions fan, I relish the prospect of the Lions as evil, intimidating bullies, rather than perrennial doormats. Detroit's evil antics vs. Denver included repeated sacks of Tebow, at least one of which was followed by a "Tebow." Ever since Timmy was seen on the ground praying for an accurate field goal attempt at the end of the Dolphin game, random, inexplicable prayer has been dubbed a "Tebow," and the Lions made sure to mix this into their sack celebrations.
Thankfully, the Lions have a bye this week, so you don't need to listen to me prattle on about them...for now. Not that I shouldn't celebrate a couple of winning months, after five decades of futility or anything, but this week the Broncos go to Oakland, and the Raiders are a slam dunk if the media want to keep this good vs. evil thing alive. They pretty much had a monopoly on evil for a while.
The other big storyline is the debate between those who think Tebow sucks, and those who don't watch the games. I feel like the Broncos need to win this one to keep the debate alive. Or lose by less than 38 points.
Of course, there are some things Timmy does quite well, like running...or praying...sometimes even winning, and rather dramatically at that. These just aren't typical QB measurables, like throwing for big yards and a high completion percentage.
You'll hear people talk about a quarterback's intangibles when they can't figure out how he wins, despite his evident lack of talent. I think we need another word for Timmy, though. How about "anti-tangibles"? Anti-tangibles would be what helps Timmy win despite his very tangible shortcomings. Those things we can put our finger on, like his incredibly slow wind up, his terrible mechanics, and his inaccuracy. If you'd like another example, I think Big Ben had some anti-tangibles going in that Super Bowl win over the Seahawks. Check his stat line from that game if you don't remember watching it.
Anyway, I'm too scared to bet this game if I could, but I think the NFL will be happier if Tebow wins. Not that they would rig games or anything.... broncos(+8)over OAKLAND (yeah, the line moved in the last bit.) Don't bet this game, especially if you don't know who is playing for the Raiders, but not even God gives Tim Tebow 8 points.
What am I saying? Of course he does...especially if Darren McFadden plays. Lets move on.
BUFFALO(-1.5)over nyjets. I probably would bet this one, though off a bye Rex Ryan may have some interesting wrinkles for his team. The Jets probably should be a better team than the Bills, but are they right now? Wagers on this week's games aren't settled according to who will be better seven months from now. Just figure out who is better now, or maybe seven days from now.
san francisco(-3.5)over WASHINGTON. Last year everyone kept pointing at the 'Niners as the talented team who could break out at any time. This year they are breaking out. Hopefully you didn't blow too much betting against them last year.
On the other hand, living in the moment when gambling has it's limitations as well. Can you believe the Redskins were the money favorite to win the NFC East within the last month? Me neither. Their ultimate collapse is inherently more inevitable, because it will happen much sooner--in a given year, that is. This year it's already happening.
Are the Redskins so bad they get points at home from West Coast teams? Um...pretty much!
PITTSBURGH(-3.5)over baltimore. The Ravens took it upon themselves to run up the score on the Steelers opening day. The betting public loves Pittsburgh to dominate the rematch, and so do I, though if you wanted to argue that the Steelers will have a big letdown after a tough win over the Patriots, I might buy it....No I wouldn't. This is Steelers-Ravens. Both of these teams know they will be in a dogfight.
tampa bay(+8)over NEW ORLEANS The Bucs have played the Saints tough of late, and New Orleans can play some pretty crappy games for such a good team. Their loss to the Rams last week makes me more inclined to understand how they were seven point dogs to the Colts back in the Super Bowl, a line I strongly disagreed with at the time. Find out if LGBT is healthy though before you risk any coin.**
nygiants(+9)over NEWENGLAND. The Pats tend to torch whoever they play coming off a loss, but I can't give points like that when my defense is as bad as the Pats. Victor Cruz, Hakeem Nicks, and Mario Manningham will run wild in the Pat secondary. I'd take my chances on the Giants here. You'll probably want to know Ahmad Bradshaw's health before you bet this one though.
green bay(-4)over SAN DIEGO. As long as the Chargers continue to play like shit, this line is reasonable. And I wouldn't feel right taking the Chargers this soon after talking all that trash. Not when I can ride their losing streak to the bottom.
On the other hand, San Diego is capable of staying with a team like the Packers (their talent, after all, is what makes their ultimate failures so enticing and epic), and the Packers have a history of letting teams back into game. I don't like to pick teams based on potential, though.
chicago(+7)over PHILADELPHIA The Eagles are among the most schizoid teams in the league right now. I have no idea if they will come to play, or not. I don't think the Eagles can really stop Matt Forte, but I expect they will beat the crap out of Jay Cutler, and this could lead to mistakes. Mistakes worse than dumping Kristen Cavallari? Perhaps. Mistakes worse than taking her back? Probably. In fact, I recommend you tread extremely lightly when even considering betting a quarterback with a reality show girlfriend. QB needs a clear head. That means no reality skanks, and no Tribulus, at least not without a doctor's supervision.
*Black Francis enjoys the Chargers humiliation because it makes him feel better about being a Cowboys fan.
**LaGarrette Blount, not Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual and Transgender. If BenJarvis Green-Ellis can be BJGE, or the Law Firm, Blount needs a catchy nickname too. As for it being gay-friendly, why the hell not? Welcome to the 21st Century.
posted by roQQ | 10:22 PM
|
0 comments
