I see this so many times on this site: "I'm taking the over on Green Bay vs. NE because both offenses put up a lot of points and the defenses suck."
Don't you think Vegas has accounted for that already? There's a reason the O/U on a game like that would be 70, not in the 40s.
Not sure why so many people on here can't see that every known factor is accounted for in a spread and total. It's not like they're randomly generated numbers or something.
Perhaps people are poorly articulating that they think Vegas has underestimated how much or how little teams will score, but from what is actually posted, it seems that people follow the "high scoring teams = OVER" or "low scoring teams = UNDER" pretty tightly.
Don't you think Vegas has accounted for that already? There's a reason the O/U on a game like that would be 70, not in the 40s.
Not sure why so many people on here can't see that every known factor is accounted for in a spread and total. It's not like they're randomly generated numbers or something.
Perhaps people are poorly articulating that they think Vegas has underestimated how much or how little teams will score, but from what is actually posted, it seems that people follow the "high scoring teams = OVER" or "low scoring teams = UNDER" pretty tightly.