What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Eagles are 1-1.5 point favorites Vs. the Saints? (1 Viewer)

Shaun

Shaun

Footballguy
Why are the Eagles 1-1.5 point favorites at home against the Saints?

Is this the gimme bet of the week, or simply too good to be true?

 
Shaun said:
Why are the Eagles 1-1.5 point favorites at home against the Saints?Is this the gimme bet of the week, or simply too good to be true?
Click to expand...
Saints were 2- 6 on the road last year. Yeah, I know, new defensive coordinator, acquired so and so, etc. but the Eagles are not the Lions. Usually the home team gets 3 points so this is a reasonable line.
 
I thought the same thing after what the Saints did last week. The I remembered it was against the Lions. The Saints basically had 5 preseason games. If they played the Rams this week it would be 6. Their season starts on Sunday...

 
Shaun said:
Why are the Eagles 1-1.5 point favorites at home against the Saints?Is this the gimme bet of the week, or simply too good to be true?
Click to expand...
If McNabb is out I am taking that bet. The Saints run defense has vastly improved over last season.
 
Snotbubbles said:
Why wouldn't they be?
Click to expand...
Questions about Kolb?EDIT: But for all intents and purposes ... a line like this is a pick 'em. The purpose of the line, anyway, is to attempt to equalize betting on both sides, right?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If I recall, the Eagles will be without Donavan McNabb as well as a pro-bowl offensive linemen this week. For them to be favorites against arguably the best offense in the league even given the 3 points is a suspect Vegas line. If anything, the line should be flat, even possibly giving the Saints the 1 point favorite, but perhaps the Eagles will still be able to squeeze out another victory at home, we'll see, I'm doubtful, especially if McNabb is out.

 
SeniorVBDStudent said:
Saints were 2- 6 on the road last year. Yeah, I know, new defensive coordinator, acquired so and so, etc. but the Eagles are not the Lions. Usually the home team gets 3 points so this is a reasonable line.
Click to expand...
:goodposting: Plus, the only teams the Saints beat on the road last year were the Chiefs and the Lions, who collectively went 2-30.And as good as Drew Brees is, in eight road games last year, he threw 11 TDs and 10 INTs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
i think they did this because they think Philly is roughly 1-1.5 points better in this game.

i could be wrong though.

 
Balance said:
i think they did this because they think Philly is roughly 1-1.5 points better in this game.i could be wrong though.
Click to expand...
You ARE wrong. Vegas does not set lines based on them thinking one team is better than the other; they set lines so they can get an equal amount of action on both sides.
 
Shaun said:
Why are the Eagles 1-1.5 point favorites at home against the Saints?Is this the gimme bet of the week, or simply too good to be true?
Click to expand...
The Saints werem't a consistently good team last season (although they are my Super Bowl pick this season) and the Eagles were one of the league's best and are coming off a big win. Perhaps Vegas isn't terribly impressed with a drubbing of the Lions.
 
Probably because Philly made it to the NFC Championship game last year and are playing at home. Also, because Vegas doesn't care that Brees had a great fantasy game last week against a horrible Detroit defense.

 
To me, that line is Vegas taking a stand. No way the squares aren't going to hammer the Saints in this game. If Philly covers, Vegas will clean up.

Is McNabb even ruled out?

 
The more telling part of the Detroit/NO game is not that NO scored 45, but Detroit scored 27. I don't think anyone believes they're scoring 40+ against the Eagles and NO playing on the road as well. If Garcia plays this week, it should be a bigger favorite than -1.5.

 
drew726 said:
The more telling part of the Detroit/NO game is not that NO scored 45, but Detroit scored 27. I don't think anyone believes they're scoring 40+ against the Eagles and NO playing on the road as well. If Garcia plays this week, it should be a bigger favorite than -1.5.
Click to expand...
FWIW, the Detroit offense scored 20 ... and was helped by a muffed punt to 7 of those points.
 
C-Bound said:
sjacksonfan said:
Ghost Rider said:
Balance said:
i think they did this because they think Philly is roughly 1-1.5 points better in this game.

i could be wrong though.
Click to expand...
You ARE wrong. Vegas does not set lines based on them thinking one team is better than the other; they set lines so they can get an equal amount of action on both sides.
Click to expand...
Nope.
Click to expand...
How about YEP. Vegas' safest situation is to make money from all the "juice".
Click to expand...
That's just wrong. Books set lines to make as much money as they can. Sharp action dictates line movement. Lines move the "wrong" way all the time. "Vegas sets lines to get equal action" is just not true. Also lines can be set and moved to protect against a vulnerable teaser number.
 
Ghost Rider said:
SeniorVBDStudent said:
Saints were 2- 6 on the road last year. Yeah, I know, new defensive coordinator, acquired so and so, etc. but the Eagles are not the Lions. Usually the home team gets 3 points so this is a reasonable line.
Click to expand...
:goodposting: Plus, the only teams the Saints beat on the road last year were the Chiefs and the Lions, who collectively went 2-30.And as good as Drew Brees is, in eight road games last year, he threw 11 TDs and 10 INTs.
Click to expand...
Although it was technically a home game for them, they also beat the Chargers in London.
 
Umm....How's the Saints pass rush?

Seriously....the Eagles have a ton of offensive weapons. If they can't get good pressure on the QB, it isn't likely to matter that the QB is Kolb. Meanwhile....Brees was terrible on the road last year and faces a defense that can bring far more to the table then the lowly Lions.

I'd be betting Philly heavily in this game if I was a betting man. It should be Philly -6.5

 
I wondered the same thing last week when they were favored at Carolina despite the fact that their OL was a mess and Westbrook hadn't played a snap in pre-season. Looks like a sucker bet to jump on NO plus the point.

 
I think Mcnabb being in could be just as big a problem as Corn on the Kolb being in. Mcnabb's abilities come from being able to scramble, I don't see him scrambling much with a broken rib. I see him playing tentatively and making mistakes. The bet is N.O. and it's a virtual lock.

 
renesauz said:
Umm....How's the Saints pass rush?

Seriously....the Eagles have a ton of offensive weapons. If they can't get good pressure on the QB, it isn't likely to matter that the QB is Kolb. Meanwhile....Brees was terrible on the road last year and faces a defense that can bring far more to the table then the lowly Lions.

I'd be betting Philly heavily in this game if I was a betting man. It should be Philly -6.5
Click to expand...
this is the thing about it for me: the spread. it's just too inviting. if mcnabb were playing and it lay at -6.5 then i wouldn't be so quick to jump on this...
 
Everybody knows how good the Eagles defense and special teams looked last week. However, one of the most overlooked stats is how good their running game was. They ran 32 times for a total of 185 yards. Much of this was in the second half when Carolina knew they were going to run and they still couldn't stop them.

So you have a good defense that can force turnovers, good special teams, and a good running game at home. There is a lot to like there even if McNabb sits (likely).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
sjacksonfan said:
C-Bound said:
sjacksonfan said:
Ghost Rider said:
Balance said:
i think they did this because they think Philly is roughly 1-1.5 points better in this game.

i could be wrong though.
Click to expand...
You ARE wrong. Vegas does not set lines based on them thinking one team is better than the other; they set lines so they can get an equal amount of action on both sides.
Click to expand...
Nope.
Click to expand...
How about YEP. Vegas' safest situation is to make money from all the "juice".
Click to expand...
That's just wrong. Books set lines to make as much money as they can. Sharp action dictates line movement. Lines move the "wrong" way all the time. "Vegas sets lines to get equal action" is just not true. Also lines can be set and moved to protect against a vulnerable teaser number.
Click to expand...
I'm not disputing sharp and public action can move lines all over the place, but the reason the lines are moving is that the linesmakers are trying regain betting equilibirium on both sides again. Do you really not believe this?
 
Shaun said:
Why are the Eagles 1-1.5 point favorites at home against the Saints?Is this the gimme bet of the week, or simply too good to be true?
Click to expand...
You are a Ravens fan you know as well as any that you don't need a QB to win. Defense baby! Brees is playing the Eagles D this week not the Lions. Also I think Westbrook goes nuts this week
 
C-Bound said:
I'm not disputing sharp and public action can move lines all over the place, but the reason the lines are moving is that the linesmakers are trying regain betting equilibirium on both sides again. Do you really not believe this?
Click to expand...
It may be true for some games (especially games with a ton of action) but it isn't true for most games. Watch the NFL lines this week and see which side has more money. I guarantee you'll see at least 2 or 3 games move away from the heavy side. Then you'll see lines that simply don't move even though you have something like a 70-30 split. This has been argued here many times and I'm 100% sure that books don't move lines so they can simply get a 50-50 split and make money from the juice. That's just overly simplistic and in a good portion of games it's just flat out wrong. Books set lines based on perception and move them to maximize profits and protect against huge losses/middles.
 
sjacksonfan said:
C-Bound said:
I'm not disputing sharp and public action can move lines all over the place, but the reason the lines are moving is that the linesmakers are trying regain betting equilibirium on both sides again. Do you really not believe this?
Click to expand...
It may be true for some games (especially games with a ton of action) but it isn't true for most games. Watch the NFL lines this week and see which side has more money. I guarantee you'll see at least 2 or 3 games move away from the heavy side. Then you'll see lines that simply don't move even though you have something like a 70-30 split. This has been argued here many times and I'm 100% sure that books don't move lines so they can simply get a 50-50 split and make money from the juice. That's just overly simplistic and in a good portion of games it's just flat out wrong. Books set lines based on perception and move them to maximize profits and protect against huge losses/middles.
Click to expand...
Fair enough as there are exceptions to every rule.
 
sjacksonfan said:
C-Bound said:
I'm not disputing sharp and public action can move lines all over the place, but the reason the lines are moving is that the linesmakers are trying regain betting equilibirium on both sides again. Do you really not believe this?
Click to expand...
It may be true for some games (especially games with a ton of action) but it isn't true for most games. Watch the NFL lines this week and see which side has more money. I guarantee you'll see at least 2 or 3 games move away from the heavy side. Then you'll see lines that simply don't move even though you have something like a 70-30 split. This has been argued here many times and I'm 100% sure that books don't move lines so they can simply get a 50-50 split and make money from the juice. That's just overly simplistic and in a good portion of games it's just flat out wrong. Books set lines based on perception and move them to maximize profits and protect against huge losses/middles.
Click to expand...
So wouldn't you say that moving the line to get equal amounts on both sides is one way to protect against huge losses?Anyway, the point of the original statement was that Vegas does not set the line because they think the Eagles are 1.5 points better than the Saints. You would agree with that correct?

 
massraider said:
To me, that line is Vegas taking a stand. No way the squares aren't going to hammer the Saints in this game. If Philly covers, Vegas will clean up. Is McNabb even ruled out?
Click to expand...
I agree. I saw the thread title and immediately thought that the Eagles were the sure play... and then was surprised to enter the thread and see everyone all over the Saints.
C-Bound said:
sjacksonfan said:
C-Bound said:
I'm not disputing sharp and public action can move lines all over the place, but the reason the lines are moving is that the linesmakers are trying regain betting equilibirium on both sides again. Do you really not believe this?
Click to expand...
It may be true for some games (especially games with a ton of action) but it isn't true for most games. Watch the NFL lines this week and see which side has more money. I guarantee you'll see at least 2 or 3 games move away from the heavy side. Then you'll see lines that simply don't move even though you have something like a 70-30 split. This has been argued here many times and I'm 100% sure that books don't move lines so they can simply get a 50-50 split and make money from the juice. That's just overly simplistic and in a good portion of games it's just flat out wrong. Books set lines based on perception and move them to maximize profits and protect against huge losses/middles.
Click to expand...
Fair enough as there are exceptions to every rule.
Click to expand...
Yes, and in this case, "Vegas is trying to get equal action on both sides" is the exception, not the rule.The *ONLY* games where Vegas's #1 priority is getting equal action are big-time championships (most notably the Superbowl), because there's so much money riding on that game that if the action isn't equal and the wrong side wins, Vegas loses a fortune (also because it's just one game, so there's no "in the long run" to even out the results).During the regular season, there is such a small amount of money on each individual game that Vegas can and does "gamble" and try to set up uneven action with the heaviest betting on the "sucker bet". If Vegas winds up being wrong and the sucker bet wins, then they'll quickly and easily make up the money on the other 4 "sucker bets" they set up that week.The rule is "Vegas is trying to make as much money as possible" (with a corollary being "Vegas is smarter than you- it knows what you think is reality, and it knows what really is reality, and it knows how to capitalize on that disconnect to take your money"). Equal action is the exception.
 
Crusaderfan said:
I wondered the same thing last week when they were favored at Carolina despite the fact that their OL was a mess and Westbrook hadn't played a snap in pre-season. Looks like a sucker bet to jump on NO plus the point.
Click to expand...
i thought the same thing last week. throw in the fact that the eagles were 0-4 on the road in september the last 2 years and i thought it was an odd line.
 
saintfool said:
renesauz said:
Umm....How's the Saints pass rush?

Seriously....the Eagles have a ton of offensive weapons. If they can't get good pressure on the QB, it isn't likely to matter that the QB is Kolb. Meanwhile....Brees was terrible on the road last year and faces a defense that can bring far more to the table then the lowly Lions.

I'd be betting Philly heavily in this game if I was a betting man. It should be Philly -6.5
Click to expand...
this is the thing about it for me: the spread. it's just too inviting. if mcnabb were playing and it lay at -6.5 then i wouldn't be so quick to jump on this...
Click to expand...
So you're saying McNabb is worth more than 5 points?
 
Chase Stuart said:
saintfool said:
renesauz said:
Umm....How's the Saints pass rush?

Seriously....the Eagles have a ton of offensive weapons. If they can't get good pressure on the QB, it isn't likely to matter that the QB is Kolb. Meanwhile....Brees was terrible on the road last year and faces a defense that can bring far more to the table then the lowly Lions.

I'd be betting Philly heavily in this game if I was a betting man. It should be Philly -6.5
Click to expand...
this is the thing about it for me: the spread. it's just too inviting. if mcnabb were playing and it lay at -6.5 then i wouldn't be so quick to jump on this...
Click to expand...
So you're saying McNabb is worth more than 5 points?
Click to expand...
Probably to the perception of the general betting public.
 
1. The Eagles have a damn good defense. There are still question marks about the Saints' D.

2. Don't be too quick to forget Week 2 of last season. Saints pounded the solid Tampa defense at home Week 1, then went on the road against the 0-1 Redskins as 3 point favorites. Everyone thought they would win handily. They lost 29-24.

3. Last season the Saints were 2-6 on the road. The two opponents they beat? The Chiefs and the Lions.

4. In 2008 Brees threw 11 tds to 12 ints when on the road. Compared to his 23 tds to 5 ints at home, not so hot.

I'm not saying this to urge people to take the Eagles, just be cautious what you do here. Bear in mind that the two seasons before 2008, Brees played better on the road than at home. However, this Saints defense is still unproven and I need to see something indicating the Saints can compete on the road again before I feel like I can bet them in a spot like this.

 
I'll be very surprised if the Eagles win this week. And it's not because McNabb is out, who I feel is one of the most overrated QBs in the league (at this point in his career). He's been on the verge of breaking down (physically) for some time now. McNabb isn't close to the same player he was earlier in his career. Only Kolb's poor performance kept McNabb off the bench last season.

This may sound crazy, but I believe Philly would be better off with Garcia or Vick this season. Despite a good FF performance, it's telling that McNabb averaged a little over 4 yards per attempt against Carolina. They've got to correct that or they're going to really struggle offensively.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
C-Bound said:
sjacksonfan said:
C-Bound said:
I'm not disputing sharp and public action can move lines all over the place, but the reason the lines are moving is that the linesmakers are trying regain betting equilibirium on both sides again. Do you really not believe this?
Click to expand...
It may be true for some games (especially games with a ton of action) but it isn't true for most games. Watch the NFL lines this week and see which side has more money. I guarantee you'll see at least 2 or 3 games move away from the heavy side. Then you'll see lines that simply don't move even though you have something like a 70-30 split. This has been argued here many times and I'm 100% sure that books don't move lines so they can simply get a 50-50 split and make money from the juice. That's just overly simplistic and in a good portion of games it's just flat out wrong. Books set lines based on perception and move them to maximize profits and protect against huge losses/middles.
Click to expand...
Fair enough as there are exceptions to every rule.
Click to expand...
Right, but simply going for a "50-50 split" is the exception, not the rule.
 
No one player is worth more than 3 points roughly. Guys like Peyton and Brees could be the exception, but I don't think McNabb is in that group.

 
PahtyTom said:
No one player is worth more than 3 points roughly. Guys like Peyton and Brees could be the exception, but I don't think McNabb is in that group.
Click to expand...
You don't think Brady is in that group? Without him last year in week 2 against the Jets, they were a mere FG favorite. Had Brady not gotten hurt, they would have been anywhere from a 7 to 10 point favorite in that game.
 
dhockster said:
sjacksonfan said:
C-Bound said:
I'm not disputing sharp and public action can move lines all over the place, but the reason the lines are moving is that the linesmakers are trying regain betting equilibirium on both sides again. Do you really not believe this?
Click to expand...
It may be true for some games (especially games with a ton of action) but it isn't true for most games. Watch the NFL lines this week and see which side has more money. I guarantee you'll see at least 2 or 3 games move away from the heavy side. Then you'll see lines that simply don't move even though you have something like a 70-30 split. This has been argued here many times and I'm 100% sure that books don't move lines so they can simply get a 50-50 split and make money from the juice. That's just overly simplistic and in a good portion of games it's just flat out wrong. Books set lines based on perception and move them to maximize profits and protect against huge losses/middles.
Click to expand...
So wouldn't you say that moving the line to get equal amounts on both sides is one way to protect against huge losses?
Click to expand...
By "protect against huge loses" I'm talking about avoiding opportunity for players to hit a middle and making sure numbers fall in off spots for teasers. You'll never see the number open on one side and move past a prime number in a heavily bet game. The juice is just an added in advantage for the book. Make no mistake they're looking to be right on every game and set up the money on the wrong side.
Anyway, the point of the original statement was that Vegas does not set the line because they think the Eagles are 1.5 points better than the Saints. You would agree with that correct?
Click to expand...
I would agree, yes. I'd imagine that number is low because they're planning on big action (or bigger than normal action) on the Saints. I'd bet the line moves closer to 3 by kickoff even if the public is on the Saints. I've already bet Philly here. Follow baseball betting for one day. See where the money is being bet and watch how some games move the opposite way. You'll quickly see how the "books try to get equal action on both sides" stance is a myth.

 
this "equal action" thing has been beaten to death. It's a myth and has been disproven time and time again.

 
In this game 1-1 1/2 points is nothing and laughable if Mcnabb does not play. NO will rip them a new blank hole with Kolb at QB

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

starks
2025 Survivor League Discussion
2
Replies
78
Views
4K
zed2283
Z
JohnnyU
Dynasty: Kaleb Johnson vs Kendre Miller
Replies
33
Views
1K
dipandglide
dipandglide
S
Draft Day Clarity
Replies
21
Views
677
Runkle
Runkle

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top