Week 17 - Rams vs Cardinals

[BStanRamFan]

1 minute ago, StLunatic88 said:

No, his actual take was that he bumped it BECAUSE of Wolford. He literally says that but sure try to make it fit your narrative

And thats even with how much he HATES Goff, literally calls him the "Parlay Killer" and says he will n longer bet on him (which he says about alot of guys)

And by the way, in no way is he an authority on this, many think he is a fake gambling guy, but you cant just chop up the truth so it fits what you want

Jesus christ. Where did it say in the FF sign up page that you have to discredit every source you disagree with? Or is that just a Rams forum pre-requesite? This is bordering on insanity. Anyone I've mentioned in the last day or Sosa, Cam DaSilva, memeber of Downtown Rams, and Bill Simmons....ALL of them have been shot down as not a credible perspective to quote lmao living in the twilight zone.

Bill Simmons" It really seems like Goff might not play. But they have to put a line on it because its the playoffs, they want people to gamble. I'm not sure how much of a difference Goff makes with the line, but because it's Wolford I had to bump it a tiny bit to +4.5"

Cousin Sal , "I thought they would give it a day to see if Goff was ready and they put it up right away. No , its OK.We're good, we've seen enough"

Nothing needed to fit my narrative, it's what he said. 

[StLunatic88]

3 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

I'm not sure how much of a difference Goff makes with the line, but because it's Wolford I had to bump it a tiny bit to +4.5"

Do you not know how to read what you just typed?

[BStanRamFan]

1 minute ago, StLunatic88 said:

Do you not know how to read what you just typed?

He said it was 4 and he bumped it to 4.5? Are you just gunna disregard all the context and everything else in the conversation to fit whatever off narrative you're running with. He bumped it HALF a point cause he thinks Wolford is playing instead of Goff. That's what someone who isnt a Rams fan thinks of the difference between Jared Goff and John Wolford. Half a god damn point. And then further Cousin Sal states hes shocked Vegas put out a line when they don't know who is starting, but they've seen enough. What part aren't you comprehending?

[StLunatic88]

Just now, BStanRamFan said:

He said it was 4 and he bumped it to 4.5? Are you just gunna disregard all the context and everything else in the conversation to fit whatever off narrative you're running with. He bumped it HALF a point cause he thinks Wolford is playing instead of Goff. That's what someone who isnt a Rams fan thinks of the difference between Jared Goff and John Wolford. Half a god damn point. And then further Cousin Sal states hes shocked Vegas put out a line when they don't know who is starting, but they've seen enough. What part aren't you comprehending?

Because they already hedged it with not knowing who would start. He bumped it all the way to his "Wolford number" while had it been Goff it would have bumped the other way.

Again, according to what you were saying, they shouldnt have moved it at all, it should have been the same number if not even better for Wolford. You keep trying to have it both ways

[BStanRamFan]

Just now, StLunatic88 said:

Because they already hedged it with not knowing who would start. He bumped it all the way to his "Wolford number" while had it been Goff it would have bumped the other way.

Again, according to what you were saying, they shouldnt have moved it at all, it should have been the same number if not even better for Wolford. You keep trying to have it both ways

you must not gamble. +4 and +4.5 is practically the same line. 0.5 is the lowest form of line movement imagineable. The way Goff is spoken of around here you would think the line would have some significant form of movement between Wolf and Goff, but no. Vegas doesn't see MUCH of a difference and from a true unbiased source, it is very telling the difference they see between Wolf and Goff. lol this some 🤡 $hit

[JonStark]

3 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

The way Goff is spoken of around here you would think the line would have some significant form of movement between Wolf and Goff, but no. 

This right here is what you are intentionally refusing to acknowledge. No one here is saying Goff is playing well. Not a single poster. He is playing poorly, just as a few other areas are that directly affect the quarterback position.

Goff is not being spoken of highly around here. He is being spoken of as our current best option short and long term. Stop putting words in others' mouths.  

[StLunatic88]

8 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

you must not gamble. +4 and +4.5 is practically the same line. 0.5 is the lowest form of line movement imagineable. The way Goff is spoken of around here you would think the line would have some significant form of movement between Wolf and Goff, but no. Vegas doesn't see MUCH of a difference and from a true unbiased source, it is very telling the difference they see between Wolf and Goff. lol this some 🤡 $hit

Try again

And you are using 2 schmucks and their opinion, which is often way off, on what the line would be for one QB vs another not actual facts from Vegas. 

We also have NO CLUE what info Vegas has, which is way more than anyone else. 

I can site a random podcast too, PMT thought it would be 7.5. Guys who are also life long gamblers, and took this as a sign that Goff will play, and Vegas already knows (believes) that

And just so you know, since youre such a seasoned gambler, half a point isnt the "lowest form of movement imaginable", its the +/- money you get on your bet

Edited January 6, 2021 by StLunatic88

[LeotheLion]

13 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

Jesus christ. Where did it say in the FF sign up page that you have to discredit every source you disagree with? Or is that just a Rams forum pre-requesite? This is bordering on insanity. Anyone I've mentioned in the last day or Sosa, Cam DaSilva, memeber of Downtown Rams, and Bill Simmons....ALL of them have been shot down

Tbf, Bill Simmons is my favorite pod but I think his overall football knowledge is pretty suspect. He opened by saying he didn't know why the Rams Cardinals wasn't the Sunday night game and said the Packers beating the Bears meant the Rams Cardinals would mean something which is entirely incorrect. 

From a gambling perspective, the line going anywhere from 3.5-6.5 protects Vegas a bit. Plus it's not like Seattle has a huge history of putting opponents away. And I saw today 3.5 is the new line at the book I use. I think that line is reflective of the 2nd matchup the Rams and Goff also played awful on offense yet hung around the entire time. 

[BStanRamFan]

1 minute ago, StLunatic88 said:

Try again

And you are using 2 schmucks and their opinion, which is often way off, on what the line would be for one QB vs another not actual facts from Vegas. 

We also have NO CLUE what info Vegas has, which is way more than anyone else. 

I can site a random podcast too, PMT thought it would be 7.5. Guys who are also life long gamblers, and took this as a sign that Goff will play, and Vegas already knows (believes) that

And just so you know, since youre such a seasoned gambler, half a point isnt the "lowest form of movement imaginable", its the +/- money you get on your bet

"Well i think..." No. your arguement is too obscure.

"Well Sosa thinks..." No. He's on twitter so it doesn't count and he likes Wolf too much.

"We Cam Da Silva thinks..." No. He's on twitter too it doesn't count.

"Well this writer from Downtown Rams thinks...." No. He's on twitter and his stats make Wolf look comparable to Goff. We need to include different stats that make Goff look better.

"Well Bill Simmons thinks..."No. He hates Goff. He's a Schmuck. And so is Cousin Sal. Their opinions dont count either.

"Well Vegas thinks..."No. Vegas is sitting on information that no one knows. Not even McVay even though he won't announce a starter until game time.

I miss anything?

[Flounch]

For those who had time, i recommend you to watched this

 

[StLunatic88]

3 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

I miss anything?

Yep, our entire point 

And youve been missing it (or likely just ignoring it so you can have an argument) from the very beginning.

So until you actually listen/read/comprehend what we are saying, youll never get it, and will likely continue to play the victim 

[JonStark]

6 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

"Well Sosa thinks..." No. He's on twitter so it doesn't count and he likes Wolf too much.

Again, not at all what I said. This is becoming a theme with you. 

[BStanRamFan]

5 minutes ago, JonStark said:

Again, not at all what I said. This is becoming a theme with you. 

You said he's trying to pump his new podcast and is driving the hype train on Wolf. Close?

 

7 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said:

Yep, our entire point 

And youve been missing it (or likely just ignoring it so you can have an argument) from the very beginning.

So until you actually listen/read/comprehend what we are saying, youll never get it, and will likely continue to play the victim 

lmfao what's your entire point? I promise you I don't feel like a victim so I apologize if it comes off that way. Just surrounded by so many open minded individuals and all their wisdom and experience. 

"Goff is our best option" is what I'm willing to guess is your entire point. 

[JonStark]

1 minute ago, BStanRamFan said:

You said he's trying to pump his new podcast and is driving the hype train on Wolf. Close?

 

lmfao what's your entire point? I promise you I don't feel like a victim so I apologize if it comes off that way. Just surrounded by so many open minded individuals and all their wisdom and experience. 

"Goff is our best option" is what I'm willing to guess is your entire point. 

I said that he's been on the Wolford hype train since the preseason, and because he is using that to make his brand, is insanely biased on this subject. How does that equate to "it doesn't count because he's on twitter"?

You've already done this on multiple occasions dude. Not agreeing with my opinion is fine, but not agreeing with a version of my opinion that you fabricated is what is losing you all credibility. 

 

[BStanRamFan]

6 minutes ago, JonStark said:

I said that he's been on the Wolford hype train since the preseason, and because he is using that to make his brand, is insanely biased on this subject. How does that equate to "it doesn't count because he's on twitter"?

You've already done this on multiple occasions dude. Not agreeing with my opinion is fine, but not agreeing with a version of my opinion that you fabricated is what is losing you all credibility. 

 

It was a comment jrry made yesterday about not valuing someone's twitter takes cause they dont have his "experience". You liked that comment. Therefore, I made the assumption.

And I promise you I have 0 desire to gain the credibility with the 4 like minded posters on this forum. I prefer to be on this side by myself cause I value reading other opinions and takes. I need to see others perspectives (rams and non rams fans). And I like to read articles with new information instead of just saying "nothing will changed my mind. Goff is our best option". Not that you said that, but others have. I'm good on this side 👍