Your unformed wild speculations about the 2016 NFL season

OK, NFL football season approaches! I have gathered that the world's most comprehensive convocation of cognizant cognoscenti is congregated here, with collectively more gaming knowledge than an entire troop of elephants has elephant poop. So let's hear your betting insights for the upcoming wagering extravaganza! What do you think will work? What new strategies do you intend to try? Are there any teams that should be particularly on bettors' radar?

Please note that your observations don't have to be backed up by logic, data, research, or anything else other than your gut feelings, which could simply be the aftermath of that entire bowl of clam dip you just devoured.

Go with the favorites... occasionally when a player is hurt/etc at last minute you can get a bet in before the lines change. To me that's +EV.

I really don't know crap, but last year I did make (fake) money in the NFL Betting Contest thread... So I guess I did something right! =p

Quote: Joeshlabotnik

OK, NFL football season approaches! I have gathered that the world's most comprehensive convocation of cognizant cognoscenti is congregated here, with collectively more gaming knowledge than an entire troop of elephants has elephant poop. So let's hear your betting insights for the upcoming wagering extravaganza! What do you think will work? What new strategies do you intend to try? Are there any teams that should be particularly on bettors' radar?

Please note that your observations don't have to be backed up by logic, data, research, or anything else other than your gut feelings, which could simply be the aftermath of that entire bowl of clam dip you just devoured.

Beautiful alliteration!

ANSWERS:

I don't know what will work.

I don't meaningfully bet sports (in a regulated environment, mostly just bets with friends), and for the Picks game, my strategy is almost so loose as to not be called a strategy.

I'm seeing the Steelers over 10.5 wins on the season a bunch, I would take the under. They have some key suspensions, a weak defensive backfield and a couple of somewhat important offensive players who may not make it through the season unscathed. I also have some questions about Gradkowski if Roethlisberger were to get hurt, he had some starts in Oakland and with Tampa Bay just last year and looked...less than great. Of course, he didn't have a lot to work with.

If you like the NFL, you should play our Picks Game!

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/sports/26543-2016-wov-nfl-picks-game/#post547011

The Eagles traded Sam Bradford to the Vikings yesterday just 8 days before their first games of the season. Their both lost sheep.

I pretty much only pay attention to the Chirfs and my fantasy team. I bet the Chiefs to win the division at +180 and the Super Bowl at 25 to 1. I do think they are better this year but it was basically a homer bet on the super Bowl - I do think we are the team to beat in the AFC West so I put 100 on that. Nothing big. I have 40 on the super bowl

A fact about NFL betting is that it's possible to bet against reduced vig on the moneyline and get the best deal by shopping around. The HA against they typical spread is 4.55% and pays out 10/11. Right now Atlantis Reno is offering -220/+190 on the Green Bay vs. Jacksonville game. That means (for the newbies) you have to bet $220 on the fave to win $100 and if you bet $100 on the dog you will win $190. Using this linked moneyline calculator I found that the HA on this bet is only 3.13%. A gain of 1.42 points for the player. Since everyone would pretty much agree that if you can beat sports it's by a small margin this would seem pretty significant. So, a moneyline bet on the fave is surely less popular because of the skimpy payout and the increased variance and the daunting task of having to win a higher % of games to be profitable. Pardon me for stating the obvious but there may be newbies out there; if you bet Green Bay at -5 and Green Bay has the ball on their own 40 yard line with 2 minutes left, and they're up by 3, they're probably going to run out the clock which means you will probably lose your bet even though you were probably right that they were more than 5 points better than Jacksonville on this day. Again, very obvious, but it's much easier to pick the winner than to pick against the points. So, if you bet the fave on the moneyline you gain % points, you have more joy in winning more often, and you avoid the high blood pressure frustration factor of losing your bet if Green Bay is up 3 on Jacksonsville's 20 yard line with 28 seconds left and the quarterback takes a knee. It's not easy to quantify a comparison of a moneyline bet to a spread bet, I know I can't do it, but my gut tells me the moneyline bet is a better bet and that's where I'm headed. And BTW I don't have any opinion at all on this game; I was just using it as an example.

https://wizardofodds.com/games/sports-betting/straight-bet-calculator/

http://www.vegasinsider.com/nfl/odds/las-vegas/money/2/

Neither the spread nor the money line bet is inherently superior. Whether either kind of bet is good depends on the specific game and situation. A money line could offer value on neither side, while the spread does offer value. To contrast your scenario, if I am watching the Syphilitic Dragons play the Pregnant Ducks, the game is tied, and the Dragons are driving for the winning score with two minutes left, I have a warm fuzzy feeling inside if I have the Ducks at +8.5, whereas the bettor who has them at +270 feels like throwing up.

Your point is a good one. I haven't looked at every book but the 2 books I did look at, betonline.ag and Bovada allow much less for their maximum bet on the money line then on the spread, sometimes about half and sometimes even much less than half. This suggests they feel more vulnerable to sharps on the money line. They also offer a much smaller maximum bet on totals then on the spread.

This is some interesting research that purports to show that betting blindly against the favorite is profitable when less than 25% of public money is bet on the dog. And there is a big jump in profitability when the amount of public money bet on the dog is less than 20%. The dog does steadily better the less money that is bet on it. Because the books will at some point start shading the line to make the favorite a worse bet. thespread.com tracks the % of money bet on the dog and the fave.

https://www.sportsinsights.com/blog/updated-80-20-nfl-betting-system/

http://www.thespread.com/nfl-football-public-betting-chart

It's going to be windy today in Baltimore with winds between 14 and 18 mph. The total of 46 has not moved significantly. The under might be a good bet because of this.

I like Oakland +1.5 over Jacsonville. The Jaguars have been so bad for so long. I'm hoping they revert to their losing ways.

Seahawks will win the conference if the Vikings retain the same kicker they have now

I like the Seahawks on the money line -143 (betonline.ag) over the Saints. The Saints excel at finding innovative ways to lose games.

Quote: djatc

Seahawks will win the conference if the Vikings retain the same kicker they have now

Well look at you!! Just 4 or so years ago you thought a tight end and a wide receiver indicated a Miata drivers top or bottom status.

Quote: Mission146

Beautiful alliteration!

ANSWERS:

I don't know what will work.

I don't meaningfully bet sports (in a regulated environment, mostly just bets with friends), and for the Picks game, my strategy is almost so loose as to not be called a strategy.

I'm seeing the Steelers over 10.5 wins on the season a bunch, I would take the under. They have some key suspensions, a weak defensive backfield and a couple of somewhat important offensive players who may not make it through the season unscathed. I also have some questions about Gradkowski if Roethlisberger were to get hurt, he had some starts in Oakland and with Tampa Bay just last year and looked...less than great. Of course, he didn't have a lot to work with.

At 4-3, I'm clearly feeling pretty good about the Steelers under 10.5, at least, that's what the season so far has dictated. Of course, most of these games have been question marks as far as breaking one way or the other, and they have lost two of those question marks and have won two others.

On the one hand, the absolute toughest part of their schedule is probably behind them, but the rest of the road isn't exactly a cakewalk. I look for @Ravens, v.Cowboys, @Colts, vGiants, @Bills and @Bengals to be a few of their tough tests of these last nine games, so I'm kind of counting on them to lose three of those, or to lose two and maybe get surprised by the Ravens at home...but I really think it will come down to losing three of the aforementioned six.

Roethlisberger is out, as I thought may happen and mentioned above, and he could miss anywhere from 1-3 of those key games I mentioned. Of course, Gradkowski is not the starter in his place, not is he even on the team anymore.

That starter is Landry Jones backed up by Zach Mettenberger, who was less than stellar in his starts with Tennessee. I will say that other than that interception in the end zone and horrible clock management, (that likely wouldn't have mattered by that point) Jones looked pretty sharp against the Patriots. However, I would certainly rather see him that Roethlisberger as far as my pick of Under 10.5 wins is concerned.

Quote: Mission146

At 4-3, I'm clearly feeling pretty good about the Steelers under 10.5,

As long as Tomlin is the coach you should feel pretty good about your bet. He is one of the worst in the NFL for in-game coaching.

I like the Eagles +2.5 (betonline.ag) over the Giants.

It's very windy in D.C. and supposed to stay that way through the night. The total has recently moved at many books from 49 to 48 for the late Skins game. The under still might be a good bet because of the wind.

Kind of funny. Reggie Bush ended his season with negative numbers for the entire season. Minus 3 yards on 12 carries. He's the first non quarterback to do that since 1970.

Quote: lilredrooster

Kind of funny. Reggie Bush ended his season with negative numbers for the entire season. Minus 3 yards on 12 carries. He's the first non quarterback to do that since 1970.

That's a surprise, as I would have expected at least a couple of RBs or TEs to have come in for one play, got hit for a loss and hurt for the season in 46 seasons of play.

Quote: Ayecarumba

That's a surprise, as I would have expected at least a couple of RBs or TEs to have come in for one play, got hit for a loss and hurt for the season in 46 seasons of play.

I believe that stat referred to players with a minimum of 10 carries.

I'm curious. Do you guys think that the extreme cold in Pittsburgh worked against the Dolphins. I mean they are pros. But still, they're living in Miami. My answer would be yes, I think it put them at a big disadvantage. But I'm not 100% sure.

Quote: lilredrooster

I'm curious. Do you guys think that the extreme cold in Pittsburgh worked against the Dolphins. I mean they are pros. But still, they're living in Miami. My answer would be yes, I think it put them at a big disadvantage. But I'm not 100% sure.

I would say yes as well. Look at how much trouble the NYG's had catching the ball in Green Bay for another example.