[jjgold]

90% of outcomes of games and pointspreads come down to turnovers and you cannot handicap them so that is why NFL is so hard to beat.

[The Genius]

90% of outcomes of games and pointspreads come down to turnovers Agree

so that is why NFL is so hard to beat Somewhat disagree

How many units would Constitute a good NFL season?

[CaneDawg]

1 turnover = 4.5 pts

[pico]

1 turnover = 4.5 pts

where did you get that stat?

same place as home field adv=3 pts?

[CaneDawg]

where did you get that stat?

same place as home field adv=3 pts?

Brandon Lang

Just made it up.

I am sure there is some sort of stat for it.

Fact: great teams can overcome turnovers, average teams cannot.

[SBR Lou]

Thanks, JJ. All this time I'd thought teams lose in the NFL because of outstanding pass completion %'s and high QB ratings.

[FadeThePublic]

Not too hard to win in the nfl. Look for lopsided games where 75% or more are on one side and fade it. More often then not you'll win

Just look at the browns last night and the vikings last monday night.

[SlickFazzer]

90% of outcomes of games and pointspreads come down to turnovers and you cannot handicap them so that is why NFL is so hard to beat.

Yes. Turnovers and penalties.

[pico]

Brandon Lang

Just made it up.

I am sure there is some sort of stat for it.

Fact: great teams can overcome turnovers, average teams cannot.

so you're saying giants are just an average team

[fiveteamer]

2 penalties cost Baltimore 2 wins.

And 2 covers.

[Brock Landers]

Turnover differential is somethign that is available as a stat, some teams are more prone to it than others..

[element1286]

90% of outcomes of games and pointspreads come down to turnovers and you cannot handicap them so that is why NFL is so hard to beat.

I agree with that.

[durito]

Turnovers are in fact the most important factor in determining ATS success and yes they are mostly random.

And yes they are worth a little over 4pts each on average.

But, not all turnovers are the same. An int 40 yards down field on 3rd and 14 is hardly damaging at all whereas a fumble returned 95yds for a TD can be a 14pt swing.

Fumbles are about 90% random in the NFL, INT's less so, but still difficult to predict.

This of course does not mean you cannot make accurate NFL predictions.

[hoopster42]

90% of outcomes of games and pointspreads come down to turnovers and you cannot handicap them so that is why NFL is so hard to beat.

you cannot handicap fumbles,

but you CAN handicap INTERCEPTIONS in both NFL and college foots

some QB's are more susceptible to throwing ints, both NFL and college

and in college, when teams get fumble-itis, it tends to spread throughout the whole team like cancer

but to your point about the NFL, you can absolutely factor in interception prone qb's

[Thomas]

I see this so many times over the years about how predictive TO's are and I agree they are just that predictive. Just like any other stat in the nfl, rushing, passing, penalties, etc etc that no one knows what the outcome will be TO's are one of the best and yes they can be handicapped. It's funny you never hear the statement you can't handicap rushing yds or passing yds etc yet that's exactly what everyone does, how the hell is that easier to predict than TO's because just like any other stat they are an unknown number until the game is in the books.

With successful handicapping %'s being say in the upper 50 % zone why can't you incorporate to's into this just like rushing or whatever stat you choose. All the stats for
to's are readily available just like every other stat and if you do the work you'll find they're just as predictive as any other you use, I use them all the time.

The matter of the fact is that most don't go that extra mile to get the right information such as team vs team, player matchups or how teams do after giving the ball up 5 times or how teams do after avg 3 takeaways do the next game and on and on. I just don't think you can say you can't predict them because it's an unknown because until the games over all stats are basically unpredictable. How many times have you seen a a great rushing team for instance playing a team that's poor against the rush get snuffed out and see your bet go down in flames.

Winning the TO battle as originally stated by jj is a 90 % winner, you just have to go out of your way to get the facts. I doubt you'll find a long term successful handicapper that doesn't incorporate TO's based on past stats to make his picks. Here's an example of one thing you can look at when capping these, teams that have the lost the TO battle 2 weeks in a row and now are playing on the road are 7-1 ats this year SF+12 and Seattle +10.5 are canidates in week 7.

To categorically dismiss them is ridiculous, you just have to find a way to use them as with any other stat.

[bettilimbroke999]

Yes. Turnovers and penalties.

Agreed, the refs pretty much decide NFL games, think about Hochuli and all the shit he's in, b/c pretty much he's decided to give 2 or 3 games this year to the losing team

[dwaechte]

Here's an example of one thing you can look at when capping these, teams that have the lost the TO battle 2 weeks in a row and now are playing on the road are 7-1 ats this year SF+12 and Seattle +10.5 are canidates in week 7.

What's the logic behind throwing in the "road" part of that?

[Thomas]

No logic just the facts, that subset yielded the best results and I was just using it as an example of the many situations you can come up with. If your capping this week leads you to either one of these juicy RD's you can reassure yourself with supporting evidence such as this. You could possibly add on the fact that RD's of +10 or more are 7-1 ats this year, that subset yields the two games above and now you have a couple of strong indicators from the recent past. I'm just throwing out some examples to try and show the many ways to use this stat

[dwaechte]

No logic just the facts, that subset yielded the best results and I was just using it as an example of the many situations you can come up with. If your capping this week leads you to either one of these juicy RD's you can reassure yourself with supporting evidence such as this. You could possibly add on the fact that RD's of +10 or more are 7-1 ats this year, that subset yields the two games above and now you have a couple of strong indicators from the recent past. I'm just throwing out some examples to try and show the many ways to use this stat

I hypothesize that anyone who tries this doesn't do very well.

[Thomas]

Well your entitled to your own assumption, but it's the kind of thinking that leaves most recreational bettors looking in from the outside I'm afraid.

I wasn't trying to tell anyone that the above is the secret to handicapping as it's just a small part of an involved process. The information I posted wasn't intended to produce a pick based on that alone, I use many more indicators when I break down a game.

If you were looking into dd road dogs this coming week, and there's 3, I think this is pretty good information. It could be the linemaker has made a mistake for instance pricing assumed good teams too high as we have seen 7 times in the last 6 weeks. You can never have enough information and some of the most obscure facts can make the difference, there is very few long time winners betting NFL using "conventional" handicapping so you have to look out of the box occasionally.

[patsfan2727]

I think alot of the stats on here are very misleading, and some are totally useless.

Remember these are HUMAN BEINGS and they can have the worst or best night of their sports lives on any given night. Also remember for any given football game you are relying on up to 30 players to play well. All the handicapping in the world will not predict some random special teams player losing focus and turniing the ball over inside your own 20 yard line.

However, the one stat that seems to do well and boggles my mind is fading the public. It seems when a line looks great and more than 70% of the money is on one side, the other side seems to win a majority of the time. I mean I understand a team may get over-valued or something by the public, but how can the majority always be so wrong?

[Thomas]

However, the one stat that seems to do well and boggles my mind is fading the public. It seems when a line looks great and more than 70% of the money is on one side, the other side seems to win a majority of the time. I mean I understand a team may get over-valued or something by the public, but how can the majority always be so wrong?

Well that's why the books are rich. I think it's what the public presumes things to be, last night is a perfect example with the giants taking the majority of the bets. People just can't see past some things especially recent ones. I know every "square" I know was on ny last night as a 9 point rf, the reason they won the super bowl last year and have been killing everyone this year at 4-0. The sad fact is they really never beat anyone this year aside from a wk 1 win against the skins, clobbering St.Louis and Seattle and having Cincy take them to overtime, those 3 teams are a combined 1-12, is just not a great resume. Cleveland on the other hand was a 10 game winner last year that made some improvements has looked like shit so far losing to dal, pitt and balt who are a combined 10-4. But the public doesn't care, they have presumed who the better team is through media bs (ESPN) and they run with it.

Your right patsfan there is money in fading the concensus, its another piece to the puzzle so to speak but if it were that simple everyone would be rich. In 2005 I believe that thinking would have lost you your house. I also don't think any information is misleading or useless used in the right context.

[frostno98]

Just ask the broncos. They had chances to put the lights out on the Chief and Jacksonville early but carelessly fumbles the ball away.

[frostno98]

90% of outcomes of games and pointspreads come down to turnovers and you cannot handicap them so that is why NFL is so hard to beat.

You can also add untimely ticky tack pass interference on the defense, and holding calls on potential game changing offensive of play.

[Legend4Aday]

"Turnovers Are Why Teams Lose In NFL"

Turnovers show which team is motivated more to win. Could be pressure on the QB or picking up the slack down field to intercept the ball.

Also i agree with Pico that "great teams can overcome turnovers, average teams cannot." However the New York Giants played like an average team monday night and Clevlands motivation to win led to turnovers.

[ZBOIZ]

90% of outcomes of games and pointspreads come down to turnovers and you cannot handicap them so that is why NFL is so hard to beat.

Thats so correct!!!

Sean Payton the head coach of the Saints is 8-0 as a Saints Head Coach with no offensive turnovers

[Chi_archie]

you may or may not be able to handicap turnovers completely..and as mentioned even if you could come up with a probability and # of turnovers..there is a big difference between 3 fumbles recovered at your own 45 and 2 pick 6's.

BUT I think sometimes the Potential for turnovers can influence a lean... to bet it or to stay away.

for instance if I like a team, and that team happens to have a monster pass rush, and a coordinator that calls alot of blitz's with a playmaking DE..and they are playing someone like kurt warner who has a BIG tendency to fumble if you breathe on him...

and is also known to throw alot of INT's under pressure... That knowledge and turnover potential puts me over the top and i'll make a play on a slight lean where maybe w/o the "warner-factor" i'd have just stayed away