Super Bowl? Eh....Whatever.

[Alex]

Yes, I meant Pats.

[SacTown Chronic]

It always amuses me to read and hear that the more physical team winning the Super Bowl is an "upset". I doubt there are 5 examples of the less physical team winning a Super Bowl matchup.


As noted in another thread:

Originally Posted by scaeagles

They are about as close to football perfection as one can be.

Originally Posted by my response

Naw. The Patriots can't run their way out of a paper bag, their secondary can be had up the middle, and their linebackers sometimes have difficulty covering elite tight ends (the playoffs will include Gates, Clark, Winslow, Miller, Witten). And if you hit their star wide receiver early and often, you can take him out of the game. Of all these things, the lack of a serious commitment to the running game might be what trips them up in the end.

It all adds up to smart gamblers* taking the +400 money line on the Giants and combining it with the under on a two-team Super Bowl parlay worth 8-1 and laughing all the way to the bank.



*Not me. I planned on placing my bet right before kick-off but I got caught up in playing a basketball game out front and forgot all about placing the bet until it was too late.