Line moves for conference title games
Chad Millman
ESPN INSIDER
If not for one of the most popular and powerful athletes of the past decade (who also happens to have created an influential charity) admitting he was a fraud; if not for the best player on the world's favorite college football team (who also happens to have lived a too-good-to-be true inspirational tale) admitting his personal life was a fraud, I know what the biggest story in sports would have been this week:
The No. 1 seed Atlanta Falcons being historic underdogs at home against the San Francisco 49ers in the NFC title game.
To some people, it still was. For a real sense of how people in Vegas view sports news compared to how sports fans view sports news, I will share a conversation I had with longtime bettor and handicapper Bryan Leonard (who, along with Orleans bookmaker Bob Scucci, gave me his conference title game line breakdowns below):
"Hey Bryan, how's it going?" I asked.
"Good, Chad," he answered.
"Man, that Manti story is crazy, huh?"
"I don't care about that. I don't care about Armstrong either. They are not sports stories. If they can't help me bet, I am not following it."
Cold-eyed business. I didn't dare tell him how excited I am about Marc Trestman coaching the Chicago Bears. Naturally, my first question was, "Man, that 49ers-Falcons line is crazy, huh?"
"Just about everyone I talked to can't believe the line has gone up so high. There were Niners-Falcons lines at halftime of the Packers-Niners game that were San Fran minus-1.5. I had the game power-rated as San Fran minus-2. The stats tell you San Fran should win this game. But for it to get all the way to five is crazy. I don't know of anyone who has a power rating that has San Francisco as even a four-point favorite."
<offer>Normally a line like this moves outside of a standard power-rated range because the public is chasing the number. And, certainly, there is some square money that caused it to rise.
"But this was just as much about wiseguy money," Leonard said. "Guys took it at three and it moved so fast, they thought they had to get it at 3.5, then it moved again, so they chased again. It wasn't until the number got to five that people started to take Atlanta and it settled in the four or 4.5."
We've known all season that the Falcons' betting market was soft. No one wants to believe in them and, to be honest, they didn't give bettors much of a reason to. Sure they were 8-1 at home, including the playoffs, but they were 4-5 against the spread in the dome. Last weekend cemented a lot of people's opinions about this team: That they are soft and anxious. Not exactly playoff material. But still, a 4-5 point dog at home as the top seed? Now you understand why this could have been the top story of the week if not for, you know, those other stories.
For some perspective, here's a chart of No. 1 seeds who have been dogs at home since 1979 in the conference title game. I got this from the guys at Don Best Sports, which they got from old friend of the column, Spreadapedia:
<!-- begin inline 2 -->[h=4]Lost dogs[/h]
<thead>
</thead><tbody>
</tbody>
<!-- end inline 2 -->There is nothing statistically relevant to be gleaned from the list. It's posterity, context, trivia. It's history, a part of which this weekend's game is making.
Meanwhile, there's another game being played this weekend, too: a rematch of last year's AFC title game between the Ravens and the Patriots. This is a quote Las Vegas Hotel bookmaker Jeff Sherman gave me Sunday night for my column, when the line opened Pats minus-9.5.
"We also have to consider the fact this is the second game. Whatever money people make earlier in the day, they will want to let ride on this game. And inevitably, that will mean betting on the favorite. So if we end up taking some Baltimore money leading up to that, we are fine. When you have liability adding up, if you are going to err, it doesn't hurt to err on the side of the favorite and get 'dog money. We need to be prepared."
It's worth repeating, because the second half of the quote is exactly how the week has played out. While it hasn't been a deluge of cash, the early money from wiseguys and the group I like to think of as educated -- but not professional bettors -- has come in on Baltimore. The line moved from minus-9.5 to minus-8.5. But, come Sunday, I wouldn't be surprised to see it get back to 10.
Take a look at the breakdowns to get a sense of why I think that.
[h=3]San Francisco 49ers at Atlanta Falcons[/h]Line moves: 49ers opened at minus-3, currently minus-4.5
Leonard says: "My concerns are that San Fran looked great at home and dominated a game against a Green Bay team that earned a lot of respect because of its name. But Atlanta wins close games, which in a situation when you are a home underdog, you have to take it into account. Here is what interests me, though: Atlanta has played badly against mobile quarterbacks. But the team has come out and said it will play zone, which will cut down Kaepernick's opportunity to run, but make his passing opportunities for short yardage better. I'd play the under rushing yards, which the public will love the over on. And I'd play the over for passing attempts and completions."
Scucci says: "We wanted to make a number as high as possible because we knew ticket count would be about 3-1 on the Niners. I thought 3.5 would be high, but as soon as we hung that, we knew four was right, all the money came in I moved quickly to 4 and then quickly to 4.5, and I got a lot of Atlanta money at plus-4.5, so 4 seems to be the right number. They are betting San Fran like Atlanta doesn't have a shot."
[h=3]Baltimore Ravens at New England Patriots[/h]Line moves: Patriots opened at minus-9.5, currently minus-8.5
Leonard says: "I was not surprised because I thought it would be in 7 range, but with Baltimore playing the fourth-longest game in history and reports of people on sideline saying it was brutal ... Still, if I did play anything I, would have to take the 'dog. The past four regular-season meetings were all less than a touchdown. My only concern is the game last week in the cold and older players on defense and New England having ability to play hurry up, which means Baltimore won't be able to bring in fresh bodies. Number-wise, I think Baltimore has value. But I am not enamored with this one."
Scucci: "Everyone has been on New England all year, we can't set them high enough. They keep covering, but it is nice to know at least the wiseguys are on Baltimore. That should even out action, because we know parlays and small money will be on New England. But, the truth is, I don't care how much wiseguys are on Baltimore, we will still need them in this game because of all the public money on New England."
</offer>
Chad Millman
ESPN INSIDER
If not for one of the most popular and powerful athletes of the past decade (who also happens to have created an influential charity) admitting he was a fraud; if not for the best player on the world's favorite college football team (who also happens to have lived a too-good-to-be true inspirational tale) admitting his personal life was a fraud, I know what the biggest story in sports would have been this week:
The No. 1 seed Atlanta Falcons being historic underdogs at home against the San Francisco 49ers in the NFC title game.
To some people, it still was. For a real sense of how people in Vegas view sports news compared to how sports fans view sports news, I will share a conversation I had with longtime bettor and handicapper Bryan Leonard (who, along with Orleans bookmaker Bob Scucci, gave me his conference title game line breakdowns below):
"Hey Bryan, how's it going?" I asked.
"Good, Chad," he answered.
"Man, that Manti story is crazy, huh?"
"I don't care about that. I don't care about Armstrong either. They are not sports stories. If they can't help me bet, I am not following it."
Cold-eyed business. I didn't dare tell him how excited I am about Marc Trestman coaching the Chicago Bears. Naturally, my first question was, "Man, that 49ers-Falcons line is crazy, huh?"
"Just about everyone I talked to can't believe the line has gone up so high. There were Niners-Falcons lines at halftime of the Packers-Niners game that were San Fran minus-1.5. I had the game power-rated as San Fran minus-2. The stats tell you San Fran should win this game. But for it to get all the way to five is crazy. I don't know of anyone who has a power rating that has San Francisco as even a four-point favorite."
<offer>Normally a line like this moves outside of a standard power-rated range because the public is chasing the number. And, certainly, there is some square money that caused it to rise.
"But this was just as much about wiseguy money," Leonard said. "Guys took it at three and it moved so fast, they thought they had to get it at 3.5, then it moved again, so they chased again. It wasn't until the number got to five that people started to take Atlanta and it settled in the four or 4.5."
We've known all season that the Falcons' betting market was soft. No one wants to believe in them and, to be honest, they didn't give bettors much of a reason to. Sure they were 8-1 at home, including the playoffs, but they were 4-5 against the spread in the dome. Last weekend cemented a lot of people's opinions about this team: That they are soft and anxious. Not exactly playoff material. But still, a 4-5 point dog at home as the top seed? Now you understand why this could have been the top story of the week if not for, you know, those other stories.
For some perspective, here's a chart of No. 1 seeds who have been dogs at home since 1979 in the conference title game. I got this from the guys at Don Best Sports, which they got from old friend of the column, Spreadapedia:
<!-- begin inline 2 -->[h=4]Lost dogs[/h]
| Title Game | No. 1 'dog | Favorite | Spread | Winner | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 AFC | PIT | NE | -3 | NE | 41-27 |
| 2001 NFC | NYG | MIN | -1 | NYG | 41-0 |
| 1998 NFC | SF | GB | -1.5 | GB | 23-10 |
| 1989 NFC | CHI | SF | -2 | SF | 28-3 |
| 1983 NFC | WSH | DAL | -2 | WSH | 31-17 |
| 1982 NFC | SF | DAL | -2 | SF | 28-27 |
| 1979 NFC | LA Rams | DAL | -3.5 | DAL | 28-0 |
<thead>
</thead><tbody>
</tbody>
<!-- end inline 2 -->There is nothing statistically relevant to be gleaned from the list. It's posterity, context, trivia. It's history, a part of which this weekend's game is making.
Meanwhile, there's another game being played this weekend, too: a rematch of last year's AFC title game between the Ravens and the Patriots. This is a quote Las Vegas Hotel bookmaker Jeff Sherman gave me Sunday night for my column, when the line opened Pats minus-9.5.
"We also have to consider the fact this is the second game. Whatever money people make earlier in the day, they will want to let ride on this game. And inevitably, that will mean betting on the favorite. So if we end up taking some Baltimore money leading up to that, we are fine. When you have liability adding up, if you are going to err, it doesn't hurt to err on the side of the favorite and get 'dog money. We need to be prepared."
It's worth repeating, because the second half of the quote is exactly how the week has played out. While it hasn't been a deluge of cash, the early money from wiseguys and the group I like to think of as educated -- but not professional bettors -- has come in on Baltimore. The line moved from minus-9.5 to minus-8.5. But, come Sunday, I wouldn't be surprised to see it get back to 10.
Take a look at the breakdowns to get a sense of why I think that.
[h=3]San Francisco 49ers at Atlanta Falcons[/h]Line moves: 49ers opened at minus-3, currently minus-4.5
Leonard says: "My concerns are that San Fran looked great at home and dominated a game against a Green Bay team that earned a lot of respect because of its name. But Atlanta wins close games, which in a situation when you are a home underdog, you have to take it into account. Here is what interests me, though: Atlanta has played badly against mobile quarterbacks. But the team has come out and said it will play zone, which will cut down Kaepernick's opportunity to run, but make his passing opportunities for short yardage better. I'd play the under rushing yards, which the public will love the over on. And I'd play the over for passing attempts and completions."
Scucci says: "We wanted to make a number as high as possible because we knew ticket count would be about 3-1 on the Niners. I thought 3.5 would be high, but as soon as we hung that, we knew four was right, all the money came in I moved quickly to 4 and then quickly to 4.5, and I got a lot of Atlanta money at plus-4.5, so 4 seems to be the right number. They are betting San Fran like Atlanta doesn't have a shot."
[h=3]Baltimore Ravens at New England Patriots[/h]Line moves: Patriots opened at minus-9.5, currently minus-8.5
Leonard says: "I was not surprised because I thought it would be in 7 range, but with Baltimore playing the fourth-longest game in history and reports of people on sideline saying it was brutal ... Still, if I did play anything I, would have to take the 'dog. The past four regular-season meetings were all less than a touchdown. My only concern is the game last week in the cold and older players on defense and New England having ability to play hurry up, which means Baltimore won't be able to bring in fresh bodies. Number-wise, I think Baltimore has value. But I am not enamored with this one."
Scucci: "Everyone has been on New England all year, we can't set them high enough. They keep covering, but it is nice to know at least the wiseguys are on Baltimore. That should even out action, because we know parlays and small money will be on New England. But, the truth is, I don't care how much wiseguys are on Baltimore, we will still need them in this game because of all the public money on New England."
</offer>
