Looking for an edge in the NFL? We analyze the betting odds for all important games below.
The NFL Playoffs Wild Card slate has plenty of exciting matchups in store. Among those games is the Los Angeles Rams playing the Detroit Lions.
The NFL Playoffs Wild Card slate has plenty of exciting matchups in store. Among those games is the Los Angeles Rams playing the Detroit Lions.
Looking for an edge in the NFL? We analyze the betting odds for all the important games below.
NFL odds courtesy of BetMGM Sportsbook. Odds updated Tuesday at 11:37 AM ET. For a full list of sports betting odds, access USA TODAY Sports Betting Scores Odds Hub.
Joe Flacco came back from the couch to lead the Cleveland Browns to the second-best record in the AFC.
Matthew Stafford returns to Detroit with a Super Bowl under his belt after being traded away three years ago this month. He'll likely be celebrated upon entering Ford Field, but don't overlook Jared Goff's motivation for revenge on the team that let him go.
Tyreek Hill returns to Kansas City to face the Chiefs after leading the league in receiving yards.
Accuracy
The NFL did an amazing job with the script for this season.
Mike McCarthy welcomes Green Bay to Jerry World to face his Cowboys. A historic rivalry that McCarthy got the better of twice in the postseason, including (of course) #DezCaughtIt game.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author uses sensationalism by stating that 'the NFL did an amazing job with the script for this season'. This statement implies that there was a predetermined outcome to events and ignores any unforeseen circumstances or player injuries. Secondly, the article makes use of selective reporting by highlighting specific narratives around each game while ignoring other important factors such as team performance and injury statuses. Thirdly, the author uses emotional manipulation by stating that 'Jared Goff has a chance to exact revenge on the team that let him go' which could influence readers' opinions without providing any evidence or context.
The NFL did an amazing job with the script for this season
These games should be appointment TV this weekend, but with the fantasy season over, fervent football fans flock to the sportsbooks with increased enthusiasm.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the NFL did a great job with the script for this season without providing any evidence or context. They also use inflammatory rhetoric when describing Aaron Rodgers joining the New York Jets and Joe Flacco leading Cleveland Browns, which could be seen as biased opinions rather than objective analysis.
The most-hyped offseason storyline, Aaron Rodgers joining the New York Jets,
Bias
(75%)
The article contains several examples of bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes the NFL and its teams by referring to them as a scripted show. They also use language that demonizes one side in a rivalry between two coaches who were once teammates.
He'll likely be celebrated upon entering Ford Field
The most-hyped offseason storyline, Aaron Rodgers joining the New York Jets, lasted just four plays
These games should be appointment TV this weekend
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
There are multiple conflicts of interest found in the article.
.Cowboys
#DezCaughtIt game.
.Green Bay
Jalen Hurts.
.Jared Goff.
Kansas City Chiefs. .Houston Texans, Baker Mayfield
.Mike McCarthy
.Packers
Sean McDermott.
William & Mary.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The author has multiple conflicts of interest on the topics provided. The article discusses NFL wild card betting and specific players such as Aaron Rodgers, Joe Flacco, Matthew Stafford, Jared Goff, Tyreek Hill and Kansas City Chiefs which are all teams that may be involved in playoffs or have a stake in the outcome of games.
The regular season ended on a positive note for the picks when the Carolina Panthers fell, 9-0, to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
Tampa Bay held the Panthers to 199 yards and 11 first downs, forced two fumbles and sacked rookie Bryce Young three times.
Carolina had two potential touchdowns overturned, two potential interceptions dropped and missed a 52-yard field goal.
Dalton Schultz hit one of his incentives with five receptions against the Indianapolis Colts, sending us back to the cashier's window on a pick of over 4½ catches.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that he was fortunate to cover when Carolina had two potential touchdowns overturned and missed a field goal. However, this statement contradicts his earlier claim that Tampa Bay held the Panthers to 199 yards and 11 first downs, forcing two fumbles and sacking rookie Bryce Young three times. Secondly, the author claims that Dalton Schultz hit one of his incentives with five receptions against Indianapolis Colts. However, this statement is also false as the Colts won by four points and did not make it to the end zone on their last-minute drive. Thirdly, the article contains a pitfall in betting markets that you might see this time of year concerning Super Bowl any time touchdown scorer prop market.
The author claims that he was fortunate to cover when Carolina had two potential touchdowns overturned and missed a field goal. However, this statement contradicts his earlier claim that Tampa Bay held the Panthers to 199 yards and 11 first downs, forcing two fumbles and sacking rookie Bryce Young three times.
The author claims that Dalton Schultz hit one of his incentives with five receptions against Indianapolis Colts. However, this statement is also false as the Colts won by four points and did not make it to the end zone on their last-minute drive.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the NFL picks and odds are based on expert analysis without providing any evidence or citation for this claim. Additionally, the author makes a false dilemma by presenting only two options for betting markets (the Super Bowl anytime touchdown scorer prop market) when there may be other options available. The article also contains an example of inflammatory rhetoric with the author stating that some unlucky breaks he had this season were nice to see, which could be perceived as insensitive or callous by some readers.
The NFL picks and odds are based on expert analysis
There may be other options available for betting markets (the Super Bowl anytime touchdown scorer prop market)
Some unlucky breaks the author had this season were nice to see
Bias
(85%)
The author has a clear bias towards the NFL and is heavily promoting their picks. They also have an interest in making money from betting markets which may influence their analysis.
Cook has scored at least one touchdown in only five games this season (29.4% of Buffalo's games) and his price to score a touchdown Sunday against the Steelers is $140 on DraftKings, implying a 42 percent chance.
DraftKings is offering the Buffalo Bills to win the AFC at 250 odds, implying around a 25 percent chance to appear in the Super Bowl. They are also offering odds on running back James Cook to score a touchdown in the Super Bowl at 550, implying around a 15 percent chance.
It's nice to see one go my way
I want to point out a pitfall in betting markets that you might see this time of year, in this case concerning the Super Bowl any touchdown scorer prop market.
The regular season ended on a positive note for my picks
The Pittsburgh Steelers are playing the Buffalo Bills on Sunday, January 1st at 1:00 PM ET on CBS.
C.J. Stroud is becoming must-watch TV as he has already become a star despite being in his rookie season.
Accuracy
The total for the game is just 36.5 and it's expected to be cold with a lot of wind which may make short punts more likely.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author uses sensationalism by stating that this game will be a low-scoring blowout and then proceeds to say that it's not likely to happen. Secondly, the author uses selective reporting by only mentioning CJ Stroud's presence as a reason for watchability while ignoring other factors such as Joe Flacco or the Browns unbelievable story. Thirdly, the author uses emotion manipulation by stating that Dallas fans will lose their minds if they lose and want head coach Mike McCarthy fired immediately and QB Dak Prescott run out of town.
CJ Stroud's presence is mentioned as a reason for watchability while ignoring other factors such as Joe Flacco or the Browns unbelievable story.
The game is not likely to be a low-scoring blowout as stated in the article.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the Bills are favored to win and that CJ Stroud is becoming must-watch TV without providing any evidence or sources for these claims. Additionally, the author makes a false dilemma by suggesting that viewers have to choose between watching all six games or none at all, when in reality they can watch as many games as they want. The article also contains an example of inflammatory rhetoric with the statement 'Dallas fans will lose their minds' if the Cowboys lose.
The Bills are 10-point favorites and the total for the game is just 36.5.
Bias
(85%)
The author has a clear bias towards the NFL and is excited about the upcoming playoff games. They are also biased against certain teams such as Buffalo Bills and Cleveland Browns.
Joe Flacco came back from the couch to lead the Cleveland Browns to the second-best record in the AFC.
Matthew Stafford returns to Detroit with a Super Bowl under his belt after being traded away three years ago this month. He'll likely be celebrated upon entering Ford Field, but don't overlook Jared Goff's motivation for revenge on the team that let him go.
Tyreek Hill returns to Kansas City to face the Chiefs after leading the league in receiving yards.
Mike McCarthy welcomes Green Bay to Jerry World to face his Cowboys. A historic rivalry that McCarthy got the better of twice in the postseason, including (of course) #DezCaughtIt game.
Accuracy
The NFL did an amazing job with the script for this season.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author uses sensationalism by stating that 'the NFL did an amazing job with the script for this season'. This statement implies that there was a predetermined outcome to events and ignores any unforeseen circumstances or player injuries. Secondly, the article makes use of selective reporting by highlighting specific narratives around each game while ignoring other important factors such as team performance and injury statuses. Thirdly, the author uses emotional manipulation by stating that 'Jared Goff has a chance to exact revenge on the team that let him go' which could influence readers' opinions without providing any evidence or context.
The NFL did an amazing job with the script for this season
These games should be appointment TV this weekend, but with the fantasy season over, fervent football fans flock to the sportsbooks with increased enthusiasm.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the NFL did a great job with the script for this season without providing any evidence or context. They also use inflammatory rhetoric when describing Aaron Rodgers joining the New York Jets and Joe Flacco leading Cleveland Browns, which could be seen as biased opinions rather than objective analysis.
The most-hyped offseason storyline, Aaron Rodgers joining the New York Jets,
Bias
(70%)
The author uses language that dehumanizes the opposing team and their fans. The use of phrases such as 'not like KC could have used a star wide receiver this season' is an example of bias.
> These games should be appointment TV this weekend, but with the fantasy season over, fervent football fans flock to the sportsbooks with increased enthusiasm.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
There are multiple conflicts of interest found in the article.
.Cowboys
#DezCaughtIt game.
.Green Bay
Jalen Hurts.
.Jared Goff.
Kansas City Chiefs. .Houston Texans, Baker Mayfield
.Mike McCarthy
.Packers
Sean McDermott.
William & Mary.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The author has multiple conflicts of interest on the topics provided. The article discusses NFL wild card betting and specific players such as Aaron Rodgers, Joe Flacco, Matthew Stafford, Jared Goff and Tyreek Hill. These are all popular football teams or players that could potentially influence the outcome of games.
The NFL Playoffs Wild Card slate has plenty of exciting matchups in store.
Looking for an edge in the NFL? We analyze the betting odds for all the important games below.
NFL odds courtesy of BetMGM Sportsbook. Odds updated Tuesday at 11:37 AM ET. For a full list of sports betting odds, access USA TODAY Sports Betting Scores Odds Hub.
Joe Flacco came back from the couch to lead the Cleveland Browns to the second-best record in the AFC.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that they are analyzing betting odds for all important games but only provides examples for four of them. Secondly, the author uses sensationalism by stating that there are plenty of exciting matchups in store which may not be true or accurate. Thirdly, the article contains selective reporting as it only mentions a few teams and ignores others who also have wild card games.
The title claims to analyze betting odds for all important games but only provides examples for four of them.
Fallacies
(70%)
The article contains several logical fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the odds from a sportsbook without providing any context or explanation for why those odds are relevant or reliable. Additionally, the author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing some of the games as 'exciting matchups', which could be seen as biased and subjective. The article also contains several dichotomous depictions, such as describing the Browns' moneyline odds as being either in favor or against them.
The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the odds from a sportsbook without providing any context or explanation for why those odds are relevant or reliable. For example: 'Favorite: Browns (-2.5) Total: 44.5 Moneyline: Browns (-147) | Texans (+123)'
The author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing some of the games as 'exciting matchups', which could be seen as biased and subjective. For example: 'Saturday Cleveland Browns at Houston Texans Odds and Lines'
Bias
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The author has multiple conflicts of interest on the topics provided. The article is about NFL playoff games and includes specific teams such as the Browns, Texans, Dolphins, Chiefs and Steelers. However it also mentions other teams that are not part of these matchups.
The article mentions several NFL teams including the Packers which are not playing in any of the wild card games.
