This post is brought to you by SPORTSBETTING.com. Get best online sports betting bonuses at this sportsbook.
If the athletes don't actually really care about who wins the game, does that make it easier or harder to gamble on? Or does it just make it dumb to gamble on? If neither the favored nor the underdog truly care about the end result than does talent mean anything? Is it dumb to put money on a game where the stakes are probably greater in your eyes than the eyes of the athletes?
You obviously have figured out by now that I am talking about the Pro Bowl. The early line on this weekend Pro Bowl is the AFC +2. Why? Probably because their quarterbacks are more Pros than Pro Bowlers. But perhaps that is actually a good thing? Maybe these quarterbacks (Schaub, Garrard, Young) feel the need to have big games and prove that they belong while the NFC quarterback contingent of McNabb, Rodgers, and Romo don't have anything to prove? And this makes the AFC the better play? Or... maybe you should in fact go with the team with the perceived better talent, because talent wins out in most occasions.
Honestly, I have no idea who's going to win, I just know that betting on David Garrard just never seems like a smart move to me. So count me in for NFC minus 2.
If the athletes don't actually really care about who wins the game, does that make it easier or harder to gamble on? Or does it just make it dumb to gamble on? If neither the favored nor the underdog truly care about the end result than does talent mean anything? Is it dumb to put money on a game where the stakes are probably greater in your eyes than the eyes of the athletes?You obviously have figured out by now that I am talking about the Pro Bowl. The early line on this weekend Pro Bowl is the AFC +2. Why? Probably because their quarterbacks are more Pros than Pro Bowlers. But perhaps that is actually a good thing? Maybe these quarterbacks (Schaub, Garrard, Young) feel the need to have big games and prove that they belong while the NFC quarterback contingent of McNabb, Rodgers, and Romo don't have anything to prove? And this makes the AFC the better play? Or... maybe you should in fact go with the team with the perceived better talent, because talent wins out in most occasions.
Honestly, I have no idea who's going to win, I just know that betting on David Garrard just never seems like a smart move to me. So count me in for NFC minus 2.
Comments