Super Bowl tech angles

Great heads up....THANKS

@DogbiteWilliams

@jowchoo

As far as the divisional over/under betting, Vegas will put those divisional o/u at what I have them at....They'll put the Lions at 4 and the Packers at 3, possibly with a bit of juice on the OVER.

The Packers intrigue me the most.  Like you said earlier, Jordan Love just 'clicked' in the 2nd half of the season and really grew.   He will only get better, young receivers that will only get better, a bad Defensive Coordinator that is now gone, and a division that has gotten weaker (Bears, Vikings ; who's the QB on each?)

Packers won 4 Divisional games last year.  I will play "over" if it is indeed "3".  At worst, that seems like a push.  

I agree.

I don't agree that the Bears will be worse, as they will have accumulated a lot of talent before it's all said and done through the draft......their quarterback situation I believe will improve this season, I could see them being this year's Packers, where the first part of their season is rough, and then things start working out.

With the Vikings they obviously have a lot of decision making to do.....Cousins and Hunter in particular.....there's even talk of trading JJ.....if I'm the GM, I am taking a bye year and trading everyone of their high priced vets for picks,....let Cousins walk, trade Hunter and Harrison Smith...they're not winning a Super Bowl this year and in the Belichick way of thinking (who admittedly was not a good personnel guy) it's better to trade a guy one year too early, rather than one year too late.

They won't do it, but they're looking at going 8-9 this year.....it's like the Chicago Bulls in the NBA....yeah you've got some guys that will win you some games, but, even if things go very well, you will just barely eke into the playoffs before getting beat in the first round.  Some organizations like the Thunder in the NBA can play the long game, but most won't.

indigo:

If you were going to build a LOS (line of scrimmage) team ranking, what weighted stats would you employ? While I totally agree like you that qb/coach aspect is numero uno for consideration, I also think there is room for value in identifying a historical LOS ranking. You previously showed some interest in this idea. Winning surely is connected to the power in the trenches, but this has basically gone untested. THOUGHTS?

@jowchoo

Interesting idea, but I haven't studied that part of handicapping and would not be inclined to look into it.

This is in the realm of those that value handicap by making calculating their own lines and betting overlays, which I have said before I don't resonate with, as my belief is that value handicapping is not a winning method in NFL football.

Historical handicapping is taking the premise that a team will outperform public expectations in certain situations where a handicapper can research from a database to get very similar situations of the present game, whereas value handicapping is saying that the betting line was not calculated as precisely as the value handicapper can do it.  Those historical angles that have produced winning results, where a past situation hits at a 60% level or above with a sample size of at least 20 games, you'll notice that the 60% threshold beats the point spread by approximately 2-3 points on average, so naturally if a value handicapper can produce lines that vary from the bookie's point spread by a similar amount, they should in theory produce very good results if their methodology is sound.

That being said, I had a crummy regular season in the NFL last season....my expectation is that this was an outlier...however if it were to happen in the near future, like next season, I would need to change my thinking, change my methodology or get out of the game and do the stock market full-time instead.

Dr. Bob has produced very good results recently, where he has used a play-by-play model to make a line on a game, versus him using a combination of value and historical data in the past with mediocre results.

Most results of a statistical nature are regressive in nature, so calculating lines based on past results is tricky.

For week 1......

Historically teams that won 4, 5, 6 or 7 games the season prior have gone 89-53 ATS in week 1 as away dogs, winning 34.5% of their games straight up.

If the week 1 line is less than or equal to +6, they've gone 49-26 ATS, 34-47 straight up (-1.01).

Possible qualifying teams in 2024.....Cardinals, Patriots, Chargers, Giants, Titans, Bears, Falcons, Vikings, Jets

Teams that won 10 or 11 games that are week 1 away dogs have gone 13-30 ATS (-3.74), going 8-38 straight up (-8.02), including 6-15-1 ATS if our away dog finished with a better record than their present opponent the previous season.

Possible qualifiers....Texans, Rams, Steelers,  Chiefs, Browns, Eagles, Bills

Great stuff which needs to be bumped in September.

One other angle I will give out....this has gone 71-24 ATS since 2013 in the NFL....it went 68-19 ATS in those years UNTIL last season, where it crashed at 3-5 ATS.  We play on the away dog with the calculated DISADVANTAGE.....which means we are going anti-value.

Historical angles can regress also, which happened last season, we would hope things get back to what was normal for about 10 years previously.

Here is the angle.......

We give 2.5 points for home field....we calculate our own line given the average point differential of two teams and subtracting the away team's differential from the home team's.  If our bookmaker line  is LESS than the calculated line, we have a play on the away dog.

Example(s).

Example 1)  In week 2, team A is an away dog to team B.  In team A's week one game they lost by 10 points, so their average point differential is -10.  Team B won by 7 points in week 1.   Our calculated line is team A +19.5.....we are subtracting team A's point differential from team B's ......team B's differential is 7 minus -10 (team A's) =17 and we give them 2.5 points for home field to get a calculated line of Team A +19.5.

Team A would qualify for being a play if the line (which it almost certainly will be) is less than +19.5.

Obviously, Vegas is never going to make a line in week two of greater than 19.5 points in the NFL.

Example 2)  Say, in week four team A is an away dog....their average scoring margin in their 3 previous games has been -4.4 and team B, the home team's average scoring margin has been  +1.1.  We subtract team A's margin (-4.4) from team B's margin (+1.1) to get a differential of team B being favored by 5.5 points, and then we give them 2.5 points for home field to get our calculated line of team A +8 for the game.  If the Vegas line is +10, we have no play because team A's line of +10 is greater (not less than) our  calculated line of +8.  

It should be obvious that WE ARE SUBTRACTING, NOT AVERAGING POINT DIFFERENTIALS!!

I will include the query text in a minute...here are the records of each week for those qualifiers since 2013 for dogs of 6 or less.

Week 2.....19-5 ATS

Week 3.....20-7 ATS

Week 4.....13-4 ATS

Week 5.....11-5 ATS

Week 6.....5-4 ATS

Week 7.....3-1 ATS

AD and line+2.5

Away dogs of greater than 6 points in this same  situation went 38-45 ATS.

Here is the query text for post #186 that did not copy correctly.

AD and line+2.5

Covers just is not cooperating and the query text I am putting on this thread is not copying correctly....if you want the query text evidently you'll have to PM me and I will send it to you.

line

When it comes to the post-season your database should go back to 1966, so you can see how the game has changed through the decades.

When it comes to the post-season your database should go back to 1966, so you can see how the game has changed through the decades.

Well I agree with that observation, situational football trends are VERY POFITABLE if used properly. To obtain previous data relating to these current situations

querying a database is optimal. I have put more value in post 2018 tech trends than I did before due to your nfl changed game (rules,athletes,parity)

It is ALL about ROI!!!