No favored team has beaten a spread of 20 or more points in 20 Years

[ausbacker]

I've tried to rationalize game scores and I can't not see the Patriots putting up 40+ on the Colts and keeping them under 14.

The Patriots are starting to hit their stride in all 3 facets of the game. This should be a blow out and a blow out early.

 

[NEP4Life]

Is this thread implying I should bet the house on the Colts?

Added: A fun bet, of course. A house of matchsticks.

 

[mgteich]

So, let's root for the spread to come down to 19.

1991 was the last time a team was favored by 20 or more points AND actually COVERED the spread (Bills over the Colts)

The 2007 Patriots went 0-4 against a 20 point or more spread

So for those who are expecting to notch an easy 40-7 game or similar to that,might want to realize that teams rarily ever cover a spread this high.

Be happy with a 21-14 win

Patriots-Colts 21-point spread is an NFL rarity

 

[robbomango]

Saints vs colts spread 13.5 score 62-7

just by putting the 21 point spread out there is enough to make will the score closer

hook the suckers having a similar team wax the clots by a 55 point differential first then drop the boom with the pats not covering a 21 pointer.

unless Pete Rose is quarterbacking and Tim Donaghy is reffing It's possible.

I don't gamble, enlighten me

 

[brdmaverick]

This is an interesting stat, and it goes to show that even though a team may be capable of beating a team by 20+ points, that is not there target. They may be happy with a 14 pt win and thus not be full pedal to the metal all game.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

The important thing to note is that none of the favorites have lost the game.

But, this should be a cold reminder about the 2007 season. Yes, we have certainly idealized that team's regular season and thought they were invincible. And yes, at times they certainly were the greatest of all-time... but you can see that as the spreads got more ridiculous, the team seemed to falter down the stretch, and into the playoffs, where their invincibility was broken. They nearly lost two games where they were favored by over 20 points, and both were to terrible quarterbacks.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

As long as this gives the OP reason to once again bet against the home team this week I'm not worried about how much we will then beat them by... There is something in the water in PA...

 

[robbomango]

This is an interesting stat, and it goes to show that even though a team may be capable of beating a team by 20+ points, that is not there target. They may be happy with a 14 pt win and thus not be full pedal to the metal all game.

That sounds good in theory but TB and BB never put that concept to practice if they can help it.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

As long as this gives the OP reason to once again bet against the home team this week I'm not worried about how much we will then beat them by... There is something in the water in PA...

Algae

 

[robbomango]

also if that's true then why would anyone put money against such a historic loser? I hate hearing stuff like this lol.

 

[robbomango]

Dam, I didn't know we were given as 19 point favorites against the Ravens in 07. that game was a nail biter

 

[TBradyOwnsYou]

Um, if the Pats don't lay a beatdown of epic proportions on them I will be extremely disappointed, because it would mean we suck. I don't like to suck. If I liked to suck, I'd be a Jets fan.

 

[mgcolby]

Dam, I didn't know we were given as 19 point favorites against the Ravens in 07. that game was a nail biter

Because they were literally allowed to tackle our receivers for 59 minutes. I was at the game, it was unreal how much the refs let go. Then they call a defensive holding on a DB against Watson that led to a first down and the Gaffney TD. I was wondering if I was going to get out of the stadium alive.

Also the wind was crazy that night.

 

[TriplecHamp]

Because they were literally allowed to tackle our receivers for 59 minutes. I was at the game, it was unreal how much the refs let go. Then they call a defensive holding on a DB against Watson that led to a first down and the Gaffney TD. I was wondering if I was going to get out of the stadium alive.

Also the wind was crazy that night.

not to mention with the death of Sean Taylor, Ray lewis and the rest of the guys from the U were playing out of their minds (for that season). Ed Reed, Willis McGahee were on fire.

 

[Tunescribe]

Everyone assumes we're going to blow out the Colts. The margin of victory could be under 10 points quite easily.

 

[TB146]

The Saints beat them by 55 points. It's not outside the realm of possibility to cover here. Let's hope that the team isn't over-confident going into the game (like a certain game against an inferior opponent in Feb. 2008).

By the way, did anybody fuss about the Saints running up the score in that game? Because, you know, they certainly would have if it was the Pats winning by 55.

 

[TB146]

Saints vs colts spread 13.5 score 62-7

just by putting the 21 point spread out there is enough to make will the score closer

hook the suckers having a similar team wax the clots by a 55 point differential first then drop the boom with the pats not covering a 21 pointer.

unless Pete Rose is quarterbacking and Tim Donaghy is reffing It's possible.

I don't gamble, enlighten me

If Rose can throw a football as well as he could throw a game, they might have a chance.

 

[jmt57]

The first thing I thought when I saw the thread title was 'have there even been more than three or four 20-point spreads in twenty years'?

As for those games in 2007, Vegas was about three or four weeks behind what was going on with the Pats all year long. They feared moving the line beyond their self-imposed regular season limit of 17 points for far too long, and when they finally did opponents were catching up with the Pats offense. So I would throw those 2007 games out of the analysis because that was a unique situation.

Looking beyond that this line is much more of a statement about how bad the Colts are then how prolific the Pats are - which is a departure from most of those other historical lines.

The Colts started out the season by losing, but losing close; after getting blown out by Houston in week one the next five losses were by an average of only 6.4 points. But after the epic loss to New Orleans they have lost by 17, 24, 14 and 8 with three of those games at home, and at least three against teams that won't make the playoffs.

The Colts have lost by an average of 11 points at home the last two weeks to a pair of three-win teams. Home field advantage is worth three points, which in essence is a six-point swing going from home to on the road. They've scored more than ten points just once in the last five weeks, and that was against a Carolina defense that had just been torched for 49 points and ranks 31st in points allowed.

The team ranked 32nd? Yep, the Indianapolis Colts.


Obviously anything can happen on any given Sunday. All I am saying is that based on how each of these two teams has been playing the last few weeks, the point spread should not be a surprise - and that what happened in 2007 has nothing to do with what the most likely outcome of this game will be.

 

[Patsfan1102]

Who cares about point spread

 

[Dutchmaster617]

You're saying the spread has an effect on the outcome of the game?

Sounds like it, too bad it doesn't at all.