NFL: Why favorites have done so well this yr?

SBR_John · 02-02-06, 04:08 PM

Scorpion,
Good question. Here is one reason:

Several years ago bookmakers simply quit moving lines to attract balance. Part of the blame went to originators like Billy Walters who would nibble on one side of a game to make the books think that was his play. The books would move the line to be on Billy's side and Billy would prove that his first bet was a fake and he would hammer the other side. Books said "fvck it" we just wont move the line and that solves that.

Next you have the good ole internet. Players are soo much sharper.

You combine a much sharper public with the fact the books desire to sit on the line and you will see a lot more years like we just had.

Mudcat · 02-02-06, 06:21 PM

Personally I don't agree with your assessment of the Super Bowl match-up at all. It looks like a toss up to me and I see a lot of value on the Seahawks moneyline.

That aside, I think sometimes we try too hard to explain things. The success of favorites this year is an example. I just see it as an aberration in the law of averages.

Like when you flip a coin, you don't expect it to go heads, tails, heads, tails . . . forever. There are going to be some extended periods where there are more of one than the other. It's just a natural statistical aberration. It would be stranger if it didn't happen.

If anything, I considered a year like this where the favorites did very well, long overdue statistically.

I have been following football pointspreads for decades and I didn't see anything dramatically different in the linesmaking this year. I just think we had a little glitch in the results. I don't expect it to happen again next year.

quarm_ · 02-02-06, 06:33 PM

Pittsburgh is not the better team...the line is -4 because they have 4x as many fans, and the bookies can expect to get a LOT more action on Pitt...
they would be dumb do make it even, but i dont see where Seattle is a weaker team.
They have a great QB, Alexander, to name only 2...

Scorpion · 02-02-06, 06:42 PM

- Seahawks regular season opponents a combinded record of 110-156.
- Steelers regular season opponents a combined record of 126-130.

- Seahawks (13-3) with 8 wins at home. They beat

Atlanta 8-8
Arizona twice 5-11
Houston 2-14
Dallas 9-7
St. Louis twice 6-10
San Francisco twice 4-12
New York Giants 11-5
Philadelphia 6-10
Tennesee 4-12
Indianapolis (minus most of their starters) 14-2

- Major road wins over powerhouses St. Louis, Arizona, San Francisco, Philadelphia, and Tennesee

- They lost the following games all on the road to

Jacksonville 12-4
Washington 10-6
Green Bay 4-12 (Game was meaningless)

Scorpion · 02-02-06, 06:43 PM

Here's who Alexander piled up yards against

Run defense rankings shown in parentheses, followed by Shaun's yards that game:

Arz * 2 (10th) - 140, 173
NYG (12th) - 110
Wash (13th) - 98
Jax (14th) - 73
Dall (15th) - 61
Indy (16th) - 139
SF * 2 (18th) - 115, 108
Phi (21st) - 49
Tenn (22nd) - 172
GB (23rd) - 73
Atl (26th) - 144
StL * 2 (28th) - 119, 165
Hou (32nd) - 141

slacker00 · 02-02-06, 06:54 PM

I think the line at Pitt -4 is dead on. Remember you've got the AFC #6 seed versus the NFC #1 seed. It isn't that Seattle is a bad team, it's more that Pittsburgh has proven to be a very very good team. The biggest problem with Seattle is that they haven't proven to be anything more than a "decent" team. There are 3 decent teams sitting home that just got cut through in the Pittsburgh buzz saw: Cincy, Indy, Denvy. The only thing remaining is the actual game. Sure, Seattle could come out, get some fluke turnovers on special teams, maybe a Hasselbeck fumble bounces to Alexander and turns into a touchdown. But, the ball has to bounce good for Seattle to win this one. Negative turnover differential is not an option to win this one for Seattle. Pittsburgh isn't Washington.

isetcap · 02-02-06, 07:03 PM

Originally posted by slacker00

I think the line at Pitt -4 is dead on. Remember you've got the AFC #6 seed versus the NFC #1 seed. It isn't that Seattle is a bad team, it's more that Pittsburgh has proven to be a very very good team. The biggest problem with Seattle is that they haven't proven to be anything more than a "decent" team. There are 3 decent teams sitting home that just got cut through in the Pittsburgh buzz saw: Cincy, Indy, Denvy. The only thing remaining is the actual game. Sure, Seattle could come out, get some fluke turnovers on special teams, maybe a Hasselbeck fumble bounces to Alexander and turns into a touchdown. But, the ball has to bounce good for Seattle to win this one. Negative turnover differential is not an option to win this one for Seattle. Pittsburgh isn't Washington.

I agree with Slacker completely. If these 2 teams played 1000 times, I think the average would come out close to 4 in Pitt's favor. That's why I see 4.5 as the number you want if you like the Seahawks.

Scorpion · 02-02-06, 07:06 PM

More on Alexander...
NFC is weak, but how weak is the NFC West.....

Alexande was consistent against NFC West.
Arz * 2 (10th) - 140, 173
SF * 2 (18th) - 115, 108
StL * 2 (28th) - 119, 165

But mediocre against the rest of their conference.
NYG (12th) - 110
Wash (13th) - 98
Dall (15th) - 61
Phi (21st) - 49
GB (23rd) - 73
Atl (26th) - 144

Scorpion · 02-02-06, 07:07 PM

The game to look at is the Dallas one, because I believe, and I could be wrong, that is the only 3-4 defense they faced all year.

21 carries, 61 yards, 0 TDs

2 weeks is not enough to prepare for 3-4

Something no one else has mentioned is.....

Seattle didn't have any success, playoffs, contender, etc until they went to the NFC.

Took them 31 years to get there...they'd still be counting if they were in the AFC.

They just need to face it. They don't match up. They beat up on losers all season.

Their defense is ranked 16th, their schedule was ranked 32nd. I have yet to see why they are so special.

isetcap · 02-02-06, 07:27 PM

Originally posted by Scorpion

Their defense is ranked 16th, their schedule was ranked 32nd. I have yet to see why they are so special.

This is the mistake many people are making when they are capping the Seahawks. They say, "Oh the Seahawks suck because they've played such a sucky schedule..." In reality, the sucky schedule only makes the Seahawks more difficult to correctly assess.

Offense-oriented teams that win a large percentage of their games will often have poor defensive stats because lesser teams are always trying to catch up by passing and taking more risks and the defense becomes more passive and conservative.

I certainly agree that the Steelers will do well in taking away the Seahawks rushing game, but the Seahawks are more than capable of neutralizing the Steeler rush which will give them success through the air. When you properly evaluate these two teams by looking at their personnel and philosophies, you begin to see a great deal of balancing factors. I think the edge lies in the more confident team with the hungrier attitude and that is Pittsburgh, but that confidence doesn't translate into 7 points or even 4.5 for that matter.

Scorpion · 02-02-06, 07:29 PM

ok, Seattle played two teams with winning records on the road and they lost both

Pitt is 6-1 on the road vs winning teams

Doesnt Seattle start two rookies in the middle of the tough defense?

quarm_ · 02-02-06, 07:29 PM

all i know is that if we see seahawks +5.5 or even 6, it is a gift.
Statistics dont mean that much, Seattle has done a good job in the playoffs - they are simply getting no respect because most are all over Pitt.

Scorpion · 02-02-06, 07:31 PM

The only chance they have is if Big Ben throws INTs, thats it.

Pitt D will stop Seattle's offense
Seattle cant stop Pitt running game with their undersized D and rookie linebackers

Scorpion · 02-02-06, 07:58 PM

So, all this shit and lets not forget, this will be like a home game for Pitt.

-4 is a bad line

Scorpion · 02-03-06, 01:15 PM

Even Skip Bayless can do a better of job of making lines:

I really want to like your guys. From your coach to your quarterback, your team has a strong spiritual core. I just don't think your team is Super Bowl worthy.

Especially your defense.

You can give me all that red-zone hocus pocus you want, but your line is undersized and extremely average. Yes, I know it led the NFL in sacks, but obviously that was a product of inferior competition. Your sack leaders, Bryce Fisher and Rocky Bernard, could just as easily be sacking groceries. Without a rush, your corners are torchable.

Skip's pick

24-14 Steelers

Yes, Tatupu is emerging as a player, but this is the Super Bowl and he's a rookie.

I repeat, Kevin, THE SUPER BOWL.

Just before kickoff, Hasselbeck will think: "Toto, I've a feeling we're not in Seattle anymore."

Your fairy-tale Sea-frauds will wake up and realize that they no longer have all you Qwest fans screaming so loudly that you create a magic carpet of noise and emotion beneath them. It will soon hit your guys like a ton of Pittsburgh bricks that they're up against a much more physical football team.

But you get one last break: These aren't the 1979 Steelers. They're the bottom seed.

And they'll still beat you.

Steelers 24, Seahawks 14.

isetcap · 02-03-06, 03:04 PM

Originally posted by Scorpion

Even Skip Bayless can do a better of job of making lines:

I don't know about everyone else in here but Skip Bayless is definitely the guy I get my information from! When he gets together with Woody Paige on Cold Pizza...whew! You know all the sharps are waking up early to catch those two moneymakers.