Minnesota Vikings vs. New York Giants: Spread Analysis and Pick Prediction
Minnesota is just 2-8 ATS in its last 10 Monday night games and they are underdogs in Week 7 facing the New York Giants.
Doesn’t say much about the Vikes to be road dogs against the winless Giants, but at least the Odds Shark computer likes their chances to blunt that MNF trend.
Point Spread: Giants opened as 2.5-point favorites; the total was 47. (Line updates and Matchup report)
Computer Prediction: 19.0-8.8 Vikings
Why the Vikings can cover the spread
In Minnesota's four losses, they had a chance to win, and they've still got Adrian Peterson. Maybe they can catch lightning in a bottle if they throw newly acquired Josh Freeman in at quarterback. Finally, they're getting points from the Giants—the 0-6, mistake-prone and seemingly disinterested Giants.
The Vikings are 4-1 ATS in five games at the Meadowlands since 1997, according to the OddsShark.com NFL database.
Why the Giants can cover the spread
New York gave Chicago a good fight last Thursday night at Soldier Field.
The Giants actually could have won that game, if not for a pick-six that went the other way in the first quarter. They also got 106 yards on the ground from Brandon Jacobs. Finally, they're working on a couple extra days off.
Perhaps that will help the G-Men break through with their first victory of the season.
The OddsShark computer is predicting the Vikings to win in a low-scoring affair, but this looks like the game the Giants break into the win column. Minnesota is unsettled at quarterback, and its defense ranks 31st overall (30th against the pass). New York finally played with a little spirit last week.
If they can carry some of that over to Monday night, the G-Men should pick up their first W and second cover of the year.
Vikings are 2-8 ATS past 10 Monday Nighters
OVER is 7-1 past 8 Vikings MNF games
Vikings 4-1 ATS in 5 games at NY Giants since 1997
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?