Take the over...
Besides...if the unders hit we will have lots of threads about the new AD and new coach.
Besides...if the unders hit we will have lots of threads about the new AD and new coach.
Vegas O/U for NU at 6
- Thread starter nebcountry
- Start date
As pointed out already, these lines are really set more to get a lot of betting on both sides of the equation, so it's not necessarily so much where they think the team will end up as much as where they think they can set it and get the most betting. Again, as already pointed out, if there is a lot of betting for either the overs or the unders, the line will move.
As for the idea that Vegas somehow knows something here, I already posted this in another thread, but I'll post it here again. I searched for the first over/under win totals released for the 2016 season, and went with the first ones I found (they were reported in an article on CBS Sports if anyone is interested) and then compared those numbers to the regular season win totals for all 128 FBS teams (meaning no conference championship games, bowl games or playoff games included), as I believe the over/under numbers are only for regular season games anyway.
In doing that comparison, again based on the numbers in the article from CBS Sports, I found that for 41 teams, or nearly 1/3rd of the 128 FBS teams, they were off by more than 2 games (2.5 or more games). Being that far off I would put in the category of being flat wrong; and being that far off nearly a third of the time would certainly not make me say they are usually pretty accurate, or anything of the sort.
A few examples of where they were WAY off: my numbers had Notre Dame at 9.5 wins, they won 4; numbers had Marshall at 8.5 wins, they won 3; they had Old Dominion at 5 wins, they won 9; they had Eastern Michigan at 3 wins, they won 7; they had Wyoming at 3.5 wins, they won 8; they had Idaho at 3.5 wins, they won 8; and they had Colorado at 4.5 wins, they won 10.
Based on the numbers I looked at, in the Big Ten alone, they were off on regular season wins by more than 2 with four teams. They had Michigan State at 7.5, they won 3; they had Wisconsin at 7, they won 10; they had Penn State at 6.5, they won 10; and they had Rutgers at 4.5 wins, they won 2. With another 6 of the 14 Big Ten teams, they were off by 1 to 2 games, and only 4 teams did they get exactly right or within a half game.
In fact, by my numbers, they were off by at least 1 to 2 games for an additional 46 teams. Combine that with the numbers from over 2 games, and you have 87 of the 128 teams that they were off by at least 1 game. For 41 teams, they were either exactly right or within a half game (one of those they got correct was Florida, who only played 11 regular season games because of weather issues. Florida had 8 regular season wins, and the line had them at 7.5. If Florida had played their 12th game against Presbyterian, they would have most likely won, and had 9 regular season wins, which would have moved them into the 1 to 2 games off category).
The point here is that Las Vegas doesn't have some magical crystal ball for setting these numbers. They are wrong more often than they are right, and pretty often by a spectacular amount.
As for the idea that Vegas somehow knows something here, I already posted this in another thread, but I'll post it here again. I searched for the first over/under win totals released for the 2016 season, and went with the first ones I found (they were reported in an article on CBS Sports if anyone is interested) and then compared those numbers to the regular season win totals for all 128 FBS teams (meaning no conference championship games, bowl games or playoff games included), as I believe the over/under numbers are only for regular season games anyway.
In doing that comparison, again based on the numbers in the article from CBS Sports, I found that for 41 teams, or nearly 1/3rd of the 128 FBS teams, they were off by more than 2 games (2.5 or more games). Being that far off I would put in the category of being flat wrong; and being that far off nearly a third of the time would certainly not make me say they are usually pretty accurate, or anything of the sort.
A few examples of where they were WAY off: my numbers had Notre Dame at 9.5 wins, they won 4; numbers had Marshall at 8.5 wins, they won 3; they had Old Dominion at 5 wins, they won 9; they had Eastern Michigan at 3 wins, they won 7; they had Wyoming at 3.5 wins, they won 8; they had Idaho at 3.5 wins, they won 8; and they had Colorado at 4.5 wins, they won 10.
Based on the numbers I looked at, in the Big Ten alone, they were off on regular season wins by more than 2 with four teams. They had Michigan State at 7.5, they won 3; they had Wisconsin at 7, they won 10; they had Penn State at 6.5, they won 10; and they had Rutgers at 4.5 wins, they won 2. With another 6 of the 14 Big Ten teams, they were off by 1 to 2 games, and only 4 teams did they get exactly right or within a half game.
In fact, by my numbers, they were off by at least 1 to 2 games for an additional 46 teams. Combine that with the numbers from over 2 games, and you have 87 of the 128 teams that they were off by at least 1 game. For 41 teams, they were either exactly right or within a half game (one of those they got correct was Florida, who only played 11 regular season games because of weather issues. Florida had 8 regular season wins, and the line had them at 7.5. If Florida had played their 12th game against Presbyterian, they would have most likely won, and had 9 regular season wins, which would have moved them into the 1 to 2 games off category).
The point here is that Las Vegas doesn't have some magical crystal ball for setting these numbers. They are wrong more often than they are right, and pretty often by a spectacular amount.
I believe in the qb position being a big improvement in the overall game plan. I agree with you on the D being the wildcard, but in putting the money on the over and the D being your bang - I think its like you having Tucos toys in hand; for the surprise the Blackshirts are going to be laying on opponents.
You're absolutely wrong. I'm one of the most optimistic of fans. I'm simply explaining why a total of 6 wins is the line. I find it hard to believe they win 6 or fewer but I am stating some facts that would explain how it could happen.
I wish people would stop with the fallacy that Vegas always wants 50-50 betting. It's simply not the case.
You can look at several sites that capture the amount of bets on games and you'll see cases where 95% are on one team and the spread doesn't move enough to balance the bets.
You can look at several sites that capture the amount of bets on games and you'll see cases where 95% are on one team and the spread doesn't move enough to balance the bets.
i think they want the money even or close to even. If you see a line with 95% of the bets on one side, I would almost guarantee the professional betters are on the 5% side.
Correct. But sometimes you'll see a team that everyone expects to win and thus 95% bet on them at a 2.5 point spread. If Vegas moved it to 3 or even 3.5 there is a better chance of 50-50 yet often 2.5 spreads lock in. I'm not naive, I'm not a rookie, I only call it how I've seen it. And for a fact Vegas has several lines that would be easy to get 50-50 yet they don't move it
You've posted a lot these last two days... haven't seen you in 3 or 4 months before that...
So which is it... You just get out of prison or treatment?
Support group for bolievers. They have a real hard time dealing with reality. Thank god their aren't many left.
Most all teams have positives and negatives coming into the season. Contrary to popular opinion, I do try to weigh both ends of the spectrum.
If I was a betting man, I would take the over.
If I was a betting man, I would take the over.
Just saw an article from a Penn State associated writer naming N as the best db group on PSU's schedule. The article included saying our db's were the 4th rated group in the country in Creating Havoc ( included deflected passes and interceptions ). We are restructuring there to get even better. I have been very optomistic about the D, this is one more thing that can be considered tangible . A couple of things. :
- We have very good coaches. The new coaches have been associated with nationally ranked teams in multiple D categories. Its been in multiple articles or look it up. We also have a great young lb coach and I am also a coach Parella fan; think he is going to put many in the NFL >
- Blackshirt character is coming back, it will be a big factor. We will be less subject to the whims of any one player that day; or it will be next MAN up.
- If you were on the team, do you think you couldn't learn this D faster than many on here think in regards to an adjustment period. After all, you are mainly learning a position. I actually believe we are going to benefit early and often from the changes.
O, yes O will be better also. So throw in that throws will be awesome most the time, and even the qb run game will be equal or better ( - better pocket play, better scrambling as in not backward, fake zone reads with lightning passes to open short men ).
The most critical factor is the o-line in regards to controlling the game and overall O execution. They will be fine against any but elite teams or units, and that will improve. My impression and hope is that there has been a lot more coaching by committee here, there will be a jump by O-line in handling superior units. Plus they are practicing against our D, that will help. GBR; I only like the red Koolaide.
Last edited:
You get your 100 back also; or did you think all the bookies give credit ?
We can play semantics
Last edited:
No worries. I read your post wrong.
Difference in understanding. Pay upfront vs who owes who at the end.
Last edited:
Sweet, so now timnsun and I are brothers and you're my new mentally challenged stepdad??
The funny thing about TINP is that he doesn't understand honeymooning in Utah doesn't make the whole sister wives thing real. Marry there? Maybe... honeymoon there? I can think of better places to honeymoon...
I would appreciate the joke more if he made a one that actually worked...
Its all good. We can find him a nice place to stay where he can hang his Bo posters on the padded walls while rocking his Carl-fense shirt. It will be like its 2010 and we are still in the Big 12 and his idol was never fired. 
..#hardtimeacceptingreality
..#hardtimeacceptingrealityIt isn't about Vegas being wrong about this O/U it is that they are in the business of making money and they still set the total at 6. The total being at anything under 9 is the sad part.
6 wins=bunch of former coaches6 wins = bunch of coaches just collecting paychecks.
College Football News has Nebraska's O/U at 8.
Goes to show not everyone is drinking the Vegas cool-aid.
Goes to show not everyone is drinking the Vegas cool-aid.
The fact you brought up Tommy as a career passer and Lee's % at Tulane (as a true frosh and sophomore) tells me you don't really watch football that much. Anyone who thinks Lee isn't a HUGE addition from Tommy is clueless. And I promise we will not be underdogs to Iowa and ark state has no chance vs us. Over 6 wins is a lock.
Not sure if any sportsbooks actually put that number up or not, but rest assured that the over would be pounded early and often. You're right though, putting a number up like that would basically just be a sportsbook manager placing a bet on Huskers under six.
I'm going to go ahead and say the real number that comes out later will be more like 7.5.
I'm pretty sure he was painting the picture from the outside looking in, not what he actually believes. People who don't know Tommy versus Tanner will only look at the difference between the four year starter and the transfer from tulane.
Um, whatever works for your narrative. I was TRYING, unsuccessfully I guess, to explain how oddsmakers place their spreads.
There were a few games Tulane was so outmanned, Tanner hit in the 30%'s under a sack attack. That brings the passing % down pretty fast. Pull a couple of those games out and his average shoots up fast. Sort of the rest of the story.
I think that can be said for a lot of athletes in football and other sports.
"If the pitcher didn't throw those 5 pitches that ended up being homeruns...he pitched a great game." Ned Yost.
Remember what our defense (majority Callahan recruits) in 2009/10 did to good QBs in Jake Locker and Nick Foles. Think there were a couple 5/19 masterpieces by NFL starters. Nick Foles generated a whopping 50 yards total offense. When you're under duress there's not a lot of room to look good.
Maybe someone stated this already but Wisconsin had an O/U of 7.5 last year with a new D.C. And QB. It can be done.
Your point is very good; but that is a one man thing throwing a pitch and not performing. Tanner was drowning in defenders coming through a no block line and having no running game; so having to put it up can tilt the results - in the referred to games . Similar to golfing in 50mph winds......... In any case he was young; he has great stats in our practice program this year and was honored for his work on the scout team. And of course there is the high praise of some Manning guy; and others - but then again we have this board.I think that can be said for a lot of athletes in football and other sports.
"If the pitcher didn't throw those 5 pitches that ended up being homeruns...he pitched a great game." Ned Yost.
Just come off it... we saw Tanner in the spring game, and granted, it was just a practice. But too many people have been praising Tanner for me to act as if we cant believe he will be good unless we see it.
I will trust Riley, Langsdorf, Archie Manning, scores of media who have seen him over silly little NebraskaFan who "doesn't know" Tanner.
We return 5of our top 6 on the Oline and lose the weakest of the 6. We replace our QB with an experienced guy who is well regarded by coaches, present and former players plus others in the biz. We return 3 of four RBs. We traded Banker for Diaco. We have a talented and experienced D backfield.
There is no call for being pre-emptively bummed out about the season.
There is no call for being pre-emptively bummed out about the season.
