Opening line
- Thread starter phatcat_rivals223240
- Start date
Our line is a lot tighter than I would have thought. Maybe Vegas has inside info that both Marty and Robinson will play.
Take the over on Iowa - Wisconsin. A 20-17 game wins you money there.
Take the over on Iowa - Wisconsin. A 20-17 game wins you money there.
Minnesota has a very veteran O-line that seemingly can open holes for ANY running back (they're down to their third teamer) and Morgan is a very good game manager at QB. And their defense is pretty good too. Hillinski will have to up his game to give us any chance to beat them.
Theare also very large. Their massive RT Faalele skews the average (he’s 380 pounds and can move!). But they rest of the OL is all over 310+ lbs.
Ho boy. @gocatsgo2003 , @Turk: where’s the beef on ours?
I hope Trevor Kent, Meiser, and Jordan Butler are ready to dig in. This could be another long day for our run defense.
Hopefully our #99 is fast enough to run circles around their RT.
I expect it to keep moving. I was surprised that we didn’t open as 10 point dogs given our performance against “real” B1G teams.
Not saying that we can’t win, but they have looked pretty good the last two weeks.
Hopefully Fitz can outfox Fleck.
I'm sure we'll have a definitive injury report and 2-deep in a day or two. /s
I feel like Vegas should just not offer a line for us because they don't know wtf is ever going on with our guys. I'm not a bettor, just a fanatic, and it's pretty frustrating. but - I'm used to it and it isn't changing.
The MO by our next three opponents will be the same.Pound it on the ground and throw to keep us honest.With all the rain in the Chicago area maybe when Minny starts to row the boat it will spring a leak and with all the weight on their OL it will sink quicker than the Titanic.Lets hope so.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong; I've never gambled a nickel on any sports event and don't intend to.
But isn't there much misunderstanding about what a "point spread" represents? It's not really an expert's prediction of how much better Team A is than Team B, and how the final score will reflect that difference. Right?
Instead the spread is the point at which the bookmaker feels the amounts bet on either above or below the magic number will equal each other. Correct? In other words, if I'm setting the spread -- regardless of what score differential I think will result -- I want to balance the bets so I don't have to make big payouts. Isn't that the whole purpose of gambling management - to assess risk and control loss? The "house" doesn't care who wins or loses the actual game or by how much. Ideally the oddsmaker will make a % of every $ bet, and wants to encourage maximum amounts wagered -- no matter which team wins or loses or by how much.
I see people on this board say, "I'll never bet against the Cats." Well, don't other teams' fans say the same thing? And if Michigan, for instance, plays NU, it stands to reason many more in Wolverine fandom are inclined to bet on their guys, rationality be damned. A spread seeks to find the tipping point at which even the "favorite's" fanatics will pause and either walk away or (gasp) bet against their own team. My guess is that the "expert" prognosticator may believe one team is, say, likely to win by 10 points --but will need to set the spread higher or lower depending on the likely volume of amounts wagered on either side.
Will someone more knowledgeable than I say where this analysis is off base? And why a team like the Wildcats with a demonstrably smaller fan base will usually be more of a gambling underdog against a UM or OSU than an objective assessment of team strengths would warrant?
Sorry to say this, but even if the line is Minny -14, I wouldn't hesitate to bet on Minny. Hope I'm wrong, but... lets face it. When your OL can't do the job, the whole team pays. That's our deal this year.
Conceptually your thinking is correct. Where the gambling entities run the most risk is when the “Sharps” ( professional) come in and spot where the betting public has a bias towards one team and drives a line up/down for no apparent reason. Your example of fan base could be a factor. However, when initially setting a line, these guys know which teams draw in action just based on fan base size and adjust accordingly. Casinos can also hedge when there is what they consider a lopsided handle on one team. It’s really incredible how good these guys are are setting a line that rarely is decided until the last few minutes of a game.
Over/under on Wisconsin - Iowa is still 36.5! Wow. If I were a gambling man I’d zag and take the over.
Yeah sort of.... but more like no, not really. They in principle would probably prefer to have things evenly matched, and will shift the spread to match, particularly early in the week if "sharp" money comes in hard on one side (which likely happened with NU Minn). But if they like their spread and their models, they will stick with it, to the point where 80%+ of the action might be on one side in a given game. They end up with big directional risk on the table in a lot of games. They might be willing to take 90% of risk on one side if it is a relatively small handle and they think the public is dumb money; but if for an NFL game (especially a big one with a large handle) they would start to shade it one way or the other.
In general the public tends to be more on the favorites, the popular brand name teams, and the road teams (bettors undervalue HFA - although in the NFL the realized HFA has been much smaller than normal this year, closer to 1 pt than the traditional 2-3 pts). In contrast, the bookies tend to be on the side of the underdogs and the home teams.
PS when the bookies lose big in a given NFL week (or during March Madness, the other time they get a handle that big) they are fond of giving interviews to ESPN or whoever for an article about the size of their losses so that the public thinks they can beat Vegas. It's a devious form of reverse marketing.
Thanks much for your reply. I can almost understand the explanation of "sharp" money but am still baffled as to how 80% of the action on one side can be good business practice. Love your description, though, of how bookies publicizing at least an occasional large payout as a "loss leader" keeps the suckers coming back.
I guess my essential point (no pun) is that individual bettors care about which team wins and by how much, but gambling management doesn't. Point spreads are how they attract interest, increase the handle, and (overall) balance the action to protect themselves. It's not an industry I've chosen to support.
It's because of the volume. It's not all that different from what market makers do with stocks/options (yeah I know they hedge every sale but volume wise).
Take the Nevada sportsbooks, in an average year they have $3-5 billion come into bets on all manner of sports/events.
They typically keep around 5-7% of that money in the end as their hold. The other 93-95% gets paid back out as winnings.
And keep in mind that the only times they really have unique one sided exposure is around major events like the Super Bowl where there's not a significant number of events going on to balance the numbers out. If there's 10-15 games a weekend, the numbers will work for them on average even if they have a misfire or two somewhere.
They've got so much experience (and computer models with all the past data) that know how to handle these situations since they come up regularly; like the situation in basketball where the Lakers almost always are the most heavily bet team to win it all because they have the biggest fanbase.
Last edited:
The other thing to keep in mind, specifically for this game: there's not a lot of inherent interest in either one of these teams, so it doesn't take much action to move the line.
Also, specifically in the state of Illinois, books can't take in-state bets on Northwestern or Illinois games - I won't break my neck speculating how this influences the spread, but it almost certainly takes away from NU (and Illinois) at least a smidge (I don't personally know if online betting is allowed in Minnesota or if those same in-state prohibition laws apply).
It's as simple as that if they think there is a 60% chance that their side wins, they are willing to allow the public money to pour in on the other side.
Their constraint won't really be on a % of action basis - it's more on a total $ at risk (if their "side") loses. So in games with limited betting activity e.g. NU vs Minn, 85% of money on one team still could be a lower risk of loss than a 57/43 split in the OSU vs PSU game (or like a 53/47 split on a NFL conf championship or the Super Bowl).
As Zeek said, generally they are willing to wear this directional risk and trust their models rather than strictly "market making" because it is diversified over a large number of games on a given football weekend, between college and pro. But if they see a lot of smart or sharp money come in early, then that will prompt them to move their lines - they trust their models are usually smarter than the public, but they don't necessarily think they are smarter than professional gamblers (who may have insight into a potential injury or trend or matchup dynamic or strategy shift by some team that their models aren't taking into account). In this case maybe the sharps like the Minny running game and recent strong offense vs our D, or know that we aren't a great home team? Or just think the original spread was too low, which it might have been. We will see........
PS I don't think we are really a good team, but I would take the Cats getting >7 at home in this one. But who knows.
Last edited:
Minnesota is a far superior coached team with no pretenders.
Its going to be very hard to keep this puppy around 7 pts. Should be a fun game to go to because I also dont think we will get blown out by 50.
If Fitz comes to his senses and knocks off the garbage politics and plays the best players then Marty will play and we could win since he is our only tough QB who isnt soft as a babby bottom.
Knock it off Fitz, you are killing us.
You think Marty is fully healthy? I'm assuming we would have seen him at least over Richardson if he was good to go already.
No sense playing Marty in the fourth quarter at Michigan. I'm thinking we might see him Saturday, especially if the offense falters early. That said, we are going to have to pass to beat Minnesota. They are very tough against the run.
Why not the 1st or 2nd quarter against Mich? The guy was either ready or he wasn't. No offense to Hilinski, he's done ok considering the circumstances, as well as we could expect. But - even a coach as stodgy as Harbaugh put in his 2nd stringer, because, you know, he can run the ball. I'm sure Fitz's response, in order of his preference, would be a) no response, MYOB and then b) he was available in an "emergency", which is wtf, because there were, presumably, at least 2 other QB's available.
I like Hilinski and think he should get a lot of reps for the rest of the season, but no reason not to play Marty unless not ready, and if not, why dress/travel the kid?
They will move the line mostly on "sharps", but heavy public betting can move the line too. Public is usually wrong, and many just bet the opposite of the heavily bet public games each week. The books trust their power ratings that make the lines. They are always lopsided on games, but in the big scheme of things, the house edge is with the books.
Also, if they start moving the lines because money pours in on one side, they can get middled, the worst outcome for any book. Its impossible to get even money on each side without moving the lines and opening yourself to a middle.
The lines will move more in the first hour at Circa (sharps betting the openers) than they do the rest of the week (barring news).
Fitz is all in with Hilsinki
Marty was definitely available last week but Fitz puts him behind the 8 ball every time. All Marty has ever done is move the offense with his grit and toughness that the other qbs lack. Yet each year, after Marty proves himself, Fitz has his favorites blow by marty. Same thing now.
He is ready to go and wanted to play last week.
Fitz sees these guys in practice. Trust Fitz to make better decisions than a fan who has only seen (very limited) Marty snaps.
Marty is a gamer, but Hilinski is the future at QB and should receive every snap this season even when Marty is healthy. Hate to break it to you guys but wins are no longer the goal, development for 2022 is. We ain't bowlin'.
Marty is a gamer, but Hilinski is the future at QB and should receive every snap this season even when Marty is healthy. Hate to break it to you guys but wins are no longer the goal, development for 2022 is. We ain't bowlin'.
I agree that this is not a year to win the West, but - if you want to talk about development, we have 4 teams left on the schedule that we can beat. if we beat 3 of them, we get to go to the Poulan Weedeater Bowl or something, meaning another 10(?) practices for the kids. Even 5 wins makes us eligible and we get those practices. Game time is great for development and I believe in playing kids with potential over certain upperclassmen like, say, a linebacker. However, we need to find out if Marty can help us win, even in limited duty. Fitz always grovels at the feet of the seniors! the seniors! Let the kid play. if he doesn't produce, take him out.
Sorry to take everyone's time, but this is part of my very late adult education.
What does "getting middled" mean?
********. 3 more wins and we’ll go to a decent bowl.
If Marty is healthy, PLAY HIM! He led us to a victory over Illannoy in 2019. He nearly got us back in the Minnesota game that same year. And if he hadn’t gotten hurt, we might have come back for the win against Duke this year.
This program should be in a bowl every year, and Marty gives us the best chance to win now. So play him and expect victory.
This makes no sense. We're 3-4 not 1-6.
If Marty is healthy (a big if), then he's going to play and be the starter if it gives us a chance at 3 more wins.
We still have a reasonable chance to go bowling that it's absolutely worth going for it. Just have to go 3-2 against Minnesota/Iowa/Wisconsin/Purdue/Illinois. I'd say there's a 20-25% chance that we go bowling; that's absolutely worth going for...
If he's not healthy and we lose the next 2 or 3 games anyways then I'd agree with you, but there's no way Fitz is punting the season this early and saying "there's always next year".
Heck we can probably go to the APR bowl if we go 5-7. Pains me to talk about going to a bowl with a losing record....
I’d have mixed feelings too. But our young players need the practices and it’s always fun to watch the Cats play.
Painful to think about but a bowl is a bowl if we can get one and with all the extra practices it brings.
Have to do whatever it takes to get to one and win it.
Line settled at Minnesota -7.5.
Very winnable game. We have enough talent, the team just needs to get it done.
Very winnable game. We have enough talent, the team just needs to get it done.