Ice_Ice_Brady

Let me add that if 90% of the betting is truly on the Pats, prepare for some disappointment on Sunday. I've seen this happen about a thousand times. Usually Vegas insiders know something that we don't, or they simply won't get caught up in an inevitable outcome and coolly realize that either team can win the game. Honestly, I expect the spread to swing back the other way before kickoff, as a lot of gamblers will now see a value opportunity in taking the Jets +3. I bet the Pats are 1.5-2 point favorites by kickoff.

I would take the Patriots outright, but laying 3 on the road is pretty steep, especially when you factor in the silent snap counts and insanely pumped up stadium. I think the Jets are the better play at Pats -3, while the Pats were definitely the better play at +1 on Sunday. From that point, I see an overreaction somewhere between Pats -1.5 and now, at Pats -2.5 - -3.

Lost in all this was an absolutely dominating defensive performance by the Jets against a good Ravens team. Sure, they gave up a few big plays, but those were just emphasized because the defense was so good for most of the game.

My prediction for this one (on a neutral field)

Sanchez goes for around 13-24, 175, a TD and a pick, and the Jets drive into the red zone a few times. Sanchez sucks, but the Jets will protect him extremely well and they'll run the ball decently. Whether they can finish off a full offensive drive or two and put at least a 10 on the board from those will be the X factor. I expect the Jets to score a couple of field goals from good field position. The Jets will score between 12-20, depending on the Jets ability to open up the passing game by putting up some big rushing plays.

Brady is the best out there, but there's no magic wand for this type of blitzing pressure. He'll obviously go to Welker as much as possible, but Wes is still about 80%. I think Wes puts up 75-85 yards but will be contained for mostly short gains. Wilson/Cromartie will focus on limiting yardage rather than pointlessly trying to defend the pass. Moss will likely get shut down by Revis, as solid, non-wishful thinking, history suggests. The Pats will score 10 points automatically because their offense is too good not to. The x-factor here is how many big plays (TDs and first downs) will the Patriots be able to gain using Gronk, Hernandez, (possibly Edelman), Tate, and Faulk. Expect the Pats to score between 16-24, depending on their 3-7 options.

So I put the Pats mean score at 20, and the Jets at 16. When you factor in the home field crowd, noise factor, and desperation from the Jets, I'd give them about three points. If I were betting on this game, I'd take the Patriots, but at no more than one point laid down.

GostkowSKI

There's 2 types of scenarios when money comes in hot and heavy on one team, and we fall into the scenario that should make Pats fans happy....

Scenario #1 is when 90%+ of the money comes in on one team, and Vegas does not correct the line. For example, this happened last week with 90%+ being on the Dolphins -3 and the Colts -2. As of Saturday, 93% was on Miami and 91% was on Indy. Those lines opened at -3 & -2 respectively, and didn't move even a half point right up until kickoff.

Essentially, the oddsmakers dug their heels in the sand and said "Keep giving us your money". Those were both your classic suckers bets, and the Texans won outright and the Bills would've pushed right up until they took an intentional safety at the end of the game. Factor in the vig and Vegas made money on those 2 games despite action hard the other way.

Scenario #2 is when 90%+ of the money comes in on one team, and oddsmakers keeps moving the line to correct it. I view this is as a small admission of guilt by them, saying "This is a bad line and we're getting exposed. Let's keep bumping it up to even it out or mitigate our losses". An example of this would be Green Bay @ Philadelphia last week. That game opened as a pick 'em. Money came in hard on the Packers, so it moved to GB -1, then GB -1.5, then GB -2, then GB -2.5, then GB -3. Not sure where it closed at, but the Packers obviously covered, and Vegas probably bumped up the Eagles to enough of a home dog to get action going the other way.

So the Pats this week fall into "Scenario #2", which is they opened at NE -1 and is now up to NE -3. While I don't think this is any reason to celebrate, it makes me feel a lot more confident about them than if they fell into "Scenario #1".

Hope this helps anyone whose curious about betting trends.

__________________
“All he does is talk. He's terrible, and you can print that. I was happy when he was in the game.”

- Bill Belichick referring to Freddie Mitchell after Super Bowl XXXIX

JMarr

It does, thanks. I hadn't thought about your scenario #1.

When I saw the Pats minus 1 1/2 early in the week I jumped all over it with the Sanchize/Schottenheimer fiasco still fresh in my memory. Didn't really stop to think about how good both the Jets and Ravens defenses are.

I still think we're going to pound them though.

Pat the Pats Fan

The Ravens did not impress me at all. Their offense consisted more of Jets mistakes than anything else.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


A sarcastic Bill Belichick on Tom Brady's finger injury, "It's not life threatening."

PatsFanSince74

Spread was up to 4 this morning.

I think that bettors are nervous about the news that Revis hasn't practiced at full speed all week and that Jenkins is Out. Against the Pats, the Jets chances are predicated on stuffing what running threat the Pats have and on the Moss threat being neutralized.

__________________
It is what it is. It wasn't what it wasn't.

Oswlek

That was not a dominant defensive performance.

On Monday, Flacco spent the first half getting completely flustered every time his #1 target wasn't wide open. Even on plays that were obviously, "if it aint there, toss it away immediately" he would dance nervously waiting to be crushed. Finally he (or the coaching staff) said, "Screw it. Every time I see 1:1 coverage not named Revis, I'm tossing it up no matter how it looks." And it worked because neither Cromartie or Wilson could stick with anyone.

Long and short, he was remarkably bad for first half and Jake Delhomme-esque in the 2nd half. Still a long season to go, but how Flacco looked Monday would have made the 2000 Ravens an 8-8 team.

People like to point at the nice pick Cromartie had, but that was Baltimore's fault. They had two receivers on that side of the field and both ran to the same spot, drawing both CBs and safety help. With the sideline acting as another defender a completion there would have been a miracle.

Another issue Baltimore had is they kept lining up the backfield protection on the wrong side. It is possible that NY has gotten sophisticated enough with their blitzing to alter the rush based on where the RB/TE line up, so that is something I'll be looking for tomorrow.

Don't discount the penalties either. Only a couple were the false start/illegal procedure variety. Most were due to the defenders being beat, which is just as bad as actually allowing the catch.

I will say that NY's tackling was superb, some of the best you'll see all year. And the front seven looks very, very good. Better than last year at stopping the run even after losing Jenkins. But that secondary has a long way to go to be anything other than an achiles heel. A good QB puts up at least 24 points on how the Jets performed last week. I expect them to be better, but they'll need to be.

__________________
"They have one objective," said Washington cornerback Shawn Springs. "They whoop people's [backsides]. If you understand that, it answers all your questions. They might not lose [this year]."

pdangle

Where did you get this (bolded) info? As far as I know, most books don't release these numbers. Even so, it could also have been the 90% small bettors were actually balanced by the 10% wise-guy (big action) players, no? Hence no line move. Anyway, just curious as to your source to better evaluate.

Wolfpack

Um, the fact that the lines moves proves that Vegas wants equal action on each team. They didn't build all those fancy hotels and casinos in the middle of nowhere by gambling. They did it by collecting in on sure things, and there ain't nothing more sure than a nice 5% profit on a game with equal action.

Wolfpack

Yeah I gotta call bullcrap on this statement. That's not how Vegas works and I would love to see where you got your statistic that over 90% of the people were betting on Miami and Indy.

Like I said in my other post, they didn't build all those casinos in the desert by gambling and taking chances. If what you say above was true, which it isn't, that would make the casinos not really any different than your typical gambler, just taking their chances with one team over another.

Wolfpack

His statement simply does not reflect how sportsbooks work. If you think about it, it doesn't even make any sense. People like to refer to "Vegas" as if it was just one single entitiy, but it isn't. People also like to refer to the "Vegas Wiseguys" as if they were some cabal of ultra-knowledgeable gamblers who were always in 100% lockstep agreement with each other, when fact is no such consortium exists.

Every casino ultimately sets their own line so you can sometimes do a little shopping around, especially early in the week, and find a half point or full point discrepancy from one sportsbook to the next (which is one of the reasons casinos will limit the amount of action you can place on any single game early in the week).

But in order for his statement to be true, you essentially have to believe that all the sportsbooks all got together and all decided unanimously to take such lopsided action on those 2 teams. And heck, you also should include all the offshore sportsbooks and overseas joints who would have to also be in on the plan. I know BoDog closed the Indy line at 2 1/2. Were they in on the conspiracy too?

That's just not how the sportsbook industry works.