Is Vegas Pro-Scabs? (1 Viewer)

[Soulfly3]

Friend of mine working the dirt in Vegas said that Vegas cleaned up over $260 million in last night's game alone. Can't verify the number, but he's pretty balls deep in the action down there, so I give some credence to his numbers.

Hypothetically, if this number was factual... And numbers are up across the board for vegas for the 2012 season (presumably due to replacement refs), do you believe there could/would be some type of conspiracy to ensure the replacements play out the entire season?

This can get very technical, and we had a good discussion about the yes/no about it... But Im interested to hear what everyone here thinks.

Go.

 

[RUSF18]

Friend of mine working the dirt in Vegas said that Vegas cleaned up over $260 million in last night's game alone. Can't verify the number, but he's pretty balls deep in the action down there, so I give some credence to his numbers.Hypothetically, if this number was factual... And numbers are up across the board for vegas for the 2012 season (presumably due to replacement refs), do you believe there could/would be some type of conspiracy to ensure the replacements play out the entire season?This can get very technical, and we had a good discussion about the yes/no about it... But Im interested to hear what everyone here thinks.Go.

The only reason they made so much money last night was because the Packers are a team that historically has a great amount of action. Add in that it's MNF (many of the degenerates who got killed on Sunday go back to the well) and the amount of bets goes even higher.I don't see a Vegas-inspired conspiracy here. Sure, there could be something on a ref-to-ref basis. But Vegas likes when things go according to plan. It's what their entire business model is based on. The level of uncertainty being brought on by the replacement refs is bad for business.

 

[FDC]

Can it really be a fix if both refs signaled opposite calls?

 

[Soulfly3]

Can it really be a fix if both refs signaled opposite calls?

Who mentioned this?The conspiracy is to ensure scabs play out the entire season; Through whatever means (financial) available.

 

[therush]

Friend of mine working the dirt in Vegas said that Vegas cleaned up over $260 million in last night's game alone. Can't verify the number, but he's pretty balls deep in the action down there, so I give some credence to his numbers.Hypothetically, if this number was factual... And numbers are up across the board for vegas for the 2012 season (presumably due to replacement refs), do you believe there could/would be some type of conspiracy to ensure the replacements play out the entire season?This can get very technical, and we had a good discussion about the yes/no about it... But Im interested to hear what everyone here thinks.Go.

Replacement ref: makes 50-80 grand a year MAX in his day to day career. Gets thrust into the midst of running a multi billion dollar industry. A small slice of a large pie is still pretty good.

 

[FDC]

Can it really be a fix if both refs signaled opposite calls?

Who mentioned this?The conspiracy is to ensure scabs play out the entire season; Through whatever means (financial) available.

Then aren't you implying the scabs benefit Vegas via fixing? We can safely assume that they do not benefit Vegas just because of shear volume

 

[eoMMan]

Scabs?

 

[Soulfly3]

Can it really be a fix if both refs signaled opposite calls?

Who mentioned this?The conspiracy is to ensure scabs play out the entire season; Through whatever means (financial) available.

Then aren't you implying the scabs benefit Vegas via fixing? We can safely assume that they do not benefit Vegas just because of shear volume

I'm not implying anything.There are many scenarios in play here. Match fixing is one. Sheer volume and stupidity of calls is another, making outcomes very unpredictable (which Vegas can account for with weak spreads) etc.Purely discussion based, Im trying to imply as little as possible

 

[da_budman]

Vegas is pro MONEY....They could care less who is reffing the games as long as they can make informed lines. Now if you are implying that the replacement refs would be more likely to take a bribe to fix a game then I suppose that there is a slightly bigger chance that they would do that than the regular refs.

 

[Shawn]

what are the real refs doing this year? oficiating high school football?

 

[Matt Bitonti]

as a general note, anyone who took the Packers -3 on the road in Seattle pretty much gets what's coming to them.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

what are the real refs doing this year? oficiating high school football?

most have full time jobs, some pretty good.

 

[Soulfly3]

Added note: MSN stating Vegas cleaned up in excess off $300m now.

 

[Shane Falco]

Can it really be a fix if both refs signaled opposite calls?

Who mentioned this?The conspiracy is to ensure scabs play out the entire season; Through whatever means (financial) available.

and the mob is thrilled with the new insider, Roger Goodell

 

[The General]

Added note: MSN stating Vegas cleaned up in excess off $300m now.

They could have easily lost 300 million then, correct? I always thought Vegas tried to get even money on both sides so the are guaranteed money instead of having money at risk.

 

[Timmay]

Most reports i have seen are showing that 68% of the money was on Green Bay and it was a $500 million flip, meaning Vegas and off-shores would of paid out $250 million, now instead won the $250 million and that is without all the local bookie action.

If i was a replacement ref making around 50k a year it would be very hard to pass up a "fixing of a game" offer for a substantial amount of cash.

 

[Marauder]

Added note: MSN stating Vegas cleaned up in excess off $300m now.

They could have easily lost 300 million then, correct? I always thought Vegas tried to get even money on both sides so the are guaranteed money instead of having money at risk.

I think thats true over the long term but not on each individual game. They are not perfect at setting the lines and, in general, they prefer not to move the lines too much once set. In reality, the books will end up taking more money on one side or the other on most games but they are good enough at setting the lines that they are confident those wins and losses on each game will even out over the long term. At least that's my understanding of it.

 

[sporthenry]

Added note: MSN stating Vegas cleaned up in excess off $300m now.

They could have easily lost 300 million then, correct? I always thought Vegas tried to get even money on both sides so the are guaranteed money instead of having money at risk.

In theory yes, but they often have more money on one side of the line. If anything, Vegas is betting themselves and usually one side of the line has more people on it. That is why you'll see a line with 60-70% of people betting one side and the line won't move or it might move the other way if the sharps are betting against the favored side. Traditionally, the underdogs usually cover b/c the public overrates good teams and underrates bad teams when in reality the teams aren't that disparate in talent and the "any given Sunday" mantra. So usually more money is on the favorite and Vegas cleans up but last year Vegas was taken to the respective woodshed b/c the favorites usually covered.