I hear extremely well. The ML was a bonanza, almost everyone took a ton of smaller Panthers bets there and only a few sharp bets on the Pats. The Pats bettors stuck to the spread, sort of as expected. On a square game those that like the dog go ML, those that like the favorite go points. That played out perfectly for the books.
One note though was that most of the props weren't so good, lots of offense generally kills the books because people are far more likely to bet overs than unders when it comes to props and will all the offense most of the player props went over. The two-point conversion supposedly hurt as well and I hear that an OT would have killed a few books.
In all though I think a non-covering Pats win with an over was exactly what the books were hoping for. In any case the game is always a blockbuster, takes a seriously bad side for the books to lose as they should be writing a ton of at least semi-balanced action to offset the decisions they face.
One note though was that most of the props weren't so good, lots of offense generally kills the books because people are far more likely to bet overs than unders when it comes to props and will all the offense most of the player props went over. The two-point conversion supposedly hurt as well and I hear that an OT would have killed a few books.
In all though I think a non-covering Pats win with an over was exactly what the books were hoping for. In any case the game is always a blockbuster, takes a seriously bad side for the books to lose as they should be writing a ton of at least semi-balanced action to offset the decisions they face.
