How much do u factor in the BYE week for the number 1 seeds

[CRM20]

Start the Debate!!!

[LT Profits]

Not a big deal any more, books have factored it into the lines more in recent years after undervaluing the rested teams in previous years.

[bobbyk1133]

Not a big deal any more, books have factored it into the lines more in recent years after undervaluing the rested teams in previous years.

Can't say I agree with this. All things being equal the bye week would alter lines indiscriminately, but there are many other factors that determine how much it is adjusted for (critical numbers, public perception, which teams are top seeds, their particular home field advantage, etc). Looking over the lines for this week's games, it's pretty clear that the bye was not weighted equally across the board.

[LT Profits]

Playoff teams off a bye
1985-2002: 44-26, 62.9% ATS
2003-2010: 10-18, 35.7% ATS

[bobbyk1133]

Playoff teams off a bye 1985-2002: 44-26, 62.9% ATS 2003-2010: 10-18, 35.7% ATS

There are so many things wrong with this comparison I wouldn't even know where to start. Confounding factors with correlations is a good place to start though.

[LT Profits]

There are so many things wrong with this comparison I wouldn't even know where to start. Confounding factors with correlations is a good place to start though.

I was merely answering the original question and my answer is to basically ignore it in most cases. It used to be that you can almost bet the bye teams blindly, but books obviously caught on and started inflating the lines. In the long run though, I think it wll just regress to the mean with the exception if a very few coaches that have proven themselves off of bye weeks with an ample sampling.

[slacker00]

Judging by the lines, veteran teams are getting more respect regarding the bye. Pats, Steelers, Bears have all been in this position before. Maybe the worry with a team like the Falcons is that they will come out flat, not knowing how to handle an off week? It's amazing that a #1 seed is only laying 2 1/2 against a #6 seed.

[D3 Mighty Ducks]

Judging by the lines, veteran teams are getting more respect regarding the bye. Pats, Steelers, Bears have all been in this position before. Maybe the worry with a team like the Falcons is that they will come out flat, not knowing how to handle an off week? It's amazing that a #1 seed is only laying 2 1/2 against a #6 seed.

Packers shouldn't even be called the 6th seed, thats just what there labeled as in the playoffs for the NFC. If the Packers were able to stay healthy all year I don't see why they wouldn't have won their division. I definitely consider the Packers in the top 3 in the whole league. So Falcons only favored -2.5 I understand why. As for answering the question I think you have to consider the rest factor especially in the Packers/Falcons game. Packers have pretty much played 2 straight must win games. The Bears made them play a whole 4 quarters to beat them back in Week 17 and the Eagles made them play a full 4 quarters as well. When looking at the Falcons on the other hand they easily handled the Panthers in Week 17 and the subs even came in later on that game. They also had this Wild Card weekend off to prepare and rest. So when looking at who has the edge in the rest factor between Green Bay and Atlanta, hands down its Atlanta. With that smash mouth running game of Turner, lets see how well that Packers defense will be able to contain Turner in the 2nd half.

[thebestthereis]

bye factor is merely bullshit and the better and more prepared teams will win at this point unless there is are monster key injuries to players that they only way they can play is to have the week off. 6th seeds have gone on to win the superbowl multiple times because they were playing better and the better team going into the playoffs. everyone is hurt and having a week off now, unless serious injuries, means next to nothing. if you have no balls and are ready to kick ass at this point you don't belong in the playoffs.

[bobbyk1133]

I was merely answering the original question and my answer is to basically ignore it in most cases. It used to be that you can almost bet the bye teams blindly, but books obviously caught on and started inflating the lines. In the long run though, I think it wll just regress to the mean with the exception if a very few coaches that have proven themselves off of bye weeks with an ample sampling.

Yes sorry, I agree with this to some extent. I guess we are talking about different things. No doubt it's not like before, but it has more to do with just the books adjusting to the bye. The league has changed etc. For specific games though, I would not ignore the bye factor completely. In some cases the line has been inflated for it, others not so much. Like all weeks, it's about picking your spots.

[slacker00]

Packers shouldn't even be called the 6th seed, thats just what there labeled as in the playoffs for the NFC. If the Packers were able to stay healthy all year I don't see why they wouldn't have won their division. I definitely consider the Packers in the top 3 in the whole league. So Falcons only favored -2.5 I understand why. As for answering the question I think you have to consider the rest factor especially in the Packers/Falcons game. Packers have pretty much played 2 straight must win games. The Bears made them play a whole 4 quarters to beat them back in Week 17 and the Eagles made them play a full 4 quarters as well. When looking at the Falcons on the other hand they easily handled the Panthers in Week 17 and the subs even came in later on that game. They also had this Wild Card weekend off to prepare and rest. So when looking at who has the edge in the rest factor between Green Bay and Atlanta, hands down its Atlanta. With that smash mouth running game of Turner, lets see how well that Packers defense will be able to contain Turner in the 2nd half.

Make that 3 straight. If the Packers had lost to the Giants, they would've been eliminated.

bye factor is merely bullshit and the better and more prepared teams will win at this point unless there is are monster key injuries to players that they only way they can play is to have the week off. 6th seeds have gone on to win the superbowl multiple times because they were playing better and the better team going into the playoffs. everyone is hurt and having a week off now, unless serious injuries, means next to nothing. if you have no balls and are ready to kick ass at this point you don't belong in the playoffs.

A 6th seed has only won the Super Bowl once, that was the Steelers in 05-06.

Just for fun, here's the seedings of the recent Super Bowl winners:
2009-10: Saints #1 seed
2008-09: Steelers #2 seed
2007-08: Giants #5 seed
2006-07: Colts #3 seed
2005-06: Steelers #6 seed
2004-05: Patriots #2 seed
2003-04: Patriots #1 seed
2002-03: Bucs #2 seed
2001-00: Patriots #2 seed
1999-00: Ravens #4 seed
1998-99: Rams #1 seed
1997-98: Broncos #1 seed

So, going back a dozen years, we've got one #6, one #5, one #4 and one #3 seed and the rest are #1's and #2's.