NFL Regular Season Total Wins

[mrburns]

Anybody see any they like?

I'm a big fan of Denver under 7.

[JCoz]

Anybody see any they like?

I'm a big fan of Denver under 7.

for everones' quick reference

NFL REG SEASON WINS
NFL REG SEASON WINS - Sep 10
NFL REGULAR SEASON WINS TEAM MUST PLAY 16 GAMES FOR ACTION
8:30 PM
12001 ARZ CARDS RSW o8½-110
12002 ARZ CARDS RSW u8½-120
8:30 PM
12003 ATL FALCONS RSW o8½EV
12004 ATL FALCONS RSW u8½-130
8:30 PM
12005 BAL RAVENS RSW o9EV
12006 BAL RAVENS RSW u9-130
8:30 PM
12007 BUF BILLS RSW o7½-125
12008 BUF BILLS RSW u7½-105
8:30 PM
12009 CAR PANTHERS RSW o8½EV
12010 CAR PANTHERS RSW u8½-130
8:30 PM
12011 CHI BEARS RSW o9EV
12012 CHI BEARS RSW u9-130
8:30 PM
12013 CIN BENGALS RSW o7-125
12014 CIN BENGALS RSW u7-105
8:30 PM
12015 CLE BROWNS RSW o6½-120
12016 CLE BROWNS RSW u6½-110
8:30 PM
12017 DAL COWBOYS RSW o9-130
12018 DAL COWBOYS RSW u9EV
8:30 PM
12019 DEN BRONCOS RSW o6½-125
12020 DEN BRONCOS RSW u6½-105
8:30 PM
12021 DET LIONS RSW o4½-130
12022 DET LIONS RSW u4½EV
8:30 PM
12023 GB PACKERS RSW o8½-130
12024 GB PACKERS RSW u8½EV
8:30 PM
12025 HOU TEXANS RSW o8-130
12026 HOU TEXANS RSW u8EV
8:30 PM
12027 IND COLTS RSW o10-115
12028 IND COLTS RSW u10-115
8:30 PM
12029 JAX JAGUARS RSW o8-130
12030 JAX JAGUARS RSW u8EV
8:30 PM
12031 KC CHIEFS RSW o6-125
12032 KC CHIEFS RSW u6-105
8:30 PM
12033 MIA DOLPHINS RSW o7½+105
12034 MIA DOLPHINS RSW u7½-135
8:30 PM
12035 MIN VIKINGS RSW o9-135
12036 MIN VIKINGS RSW u9+105
8:30 PM
12037 NE PATRIOTS RSW o12EV
12038 NE PATRIOTS RSW u12-130
8:30 PM
12039 NO SAINTS RSW o8½-130
12040 NO SAINTS RSW u8½EV
8:30 PM
12041 NY GIANTS RSW o9½-130
12042 NY GIANTS RSW u9½EV
8:30 PM
12043 NY JETS RSW o7-125
12044 NY JETS RSW u7-105
8:30 PM
12045 OAK RAIDERS RSW o5½-130
12046 OAK RAIDERS RSW u5½EV
8:30 PM
12047 PHI EAGLES RSW o10EV
12048 PHI EAGLES RSW u10-130
8:30 PM
12049 PIT STEELERS RSW o10½-120
12050 PIT STEELERS RSW u10½-110
8:30 PM
12051 SD CHARGERS RSW o10-125
12052 SD CHARGERS RSW u10-105
8:30 PM
12053 SF 49ERS RSW o7½-105
12054 SF 49ERS RSW u7½-125
8:30 PM
12055 SEA SEAHAWKS RSW o8-125
12056 SEA SEAHAWKS RSW u8-105
8:30 PM
12057 STL RAMS RSW o6-110
12058 STL RAMS RSW u6-120
8:30 PM
12059 TB BUCCANEERS RSW o6-120
12060 TB BUCCANEERS RSW u6-110
8:30 PM
12061 TEN TITANS RSW o9EV
12062 TEN TITANS RSW u9-130
8:30 PM
12063 WAS REDSKINS RSW o8-105
12064 WAS REDSKINS RSW u8-125

[pup]

Seattle Over
Bears under

[Action Boy]

Seattle over
Denver under

[rebelwithoutaclue]

Chargers over - Oakland, Denver, and KC could easily be 3 of the 5-7 worst teams in the league
Seattle over - easy money

Jets under - the division is loaded and they've got a college senior for their QB and only 1 decent receiver

[Action Boy]

I just laid some coin down in Vegas on the following teams

Seattle Over 8 wins for -120
Denver Under 7 1/2 wins for -175 (I was very fortunate to get the hook as many places had it at 7)

I didn't care for the odds on Denver but I loaded up anyway. New coach, new system, switching to a 3-4 defense and they don't have the personnel to play that scheme yet. Kyle Orton at QB, Brandon Marshall acting like the next T.O., Brian Dawkins at SS (with 14 years on his legs) and did I mention their schedule? I gave them wins over Cincinnati, Cleveland, Kansas City (twice) and Oakland (twice). I was generous with double wins over K.C. and Oakland as they typically split every year. That being said the meat of their schedule reads Dallas, New England, @ San Diego, @ Baltimore, Pittsburgh, @ Washington, San Diego, N.Y. Giants, @ Indianapolis and @ Philadelphia......absolutely brutal schedule??

I have liked Seattle all along as they are being undervalued in a weak division. New coach out to prove something and most importantly they are healthly this year after being a mash unit last year. The only concern I have is can Hasselbeck hold up for the entire year? I have read a couple of articles that his disk issue is still a touchy subject.

[Guest]

Seattle over

Arizona to crash & burn. Luckiest SB team ever.

[Bigfist]

I made the following bets in Vegas a few weeks ago..can't believe I made so many!

Pats, over 11.5 (-115)
Packers, over 8.5 (-120)
Browns, over 6.5 (-110)
Tampa, under 6 (+120)
Seattle, under 8 (+100)
Atlanta, over 8.5 (+100)
Rams, under 5.5 (+145)
Bills, under 7.5 (+115)
Jets, under 7 (+125)
Chargers, over 9.5 (-170)

Way more than I usually do. Not thrilled with so many overs (5), but that is how I saw it!

[skatingtripods]

I like Carolina over. Tough schedule, but they always play well.

I have to think BAL over too.

Rams under.

[Bigfist]

Just to add a little comment. In general, especially with the NFL, I think unders are a bit safer than overs. The numbers are posted, assuming all key players stay healthy. An injury during the preseason can and do affect the posted win total. For instance..say Tom Brady goes down in the first exhibition game with another knee injury. You can bet that the Pats won't be listed at 11.5. Same for the Colts and Manning.

That is why I said I was not happy about the number of overs I bet on.

[leadpipe]

Just to add a little comment. In general, especially with the NFL, I think unders are a bit safer than overs. The numbers are posted, assuming all key players stay healthy. An injury during the preseason can and do affect the posted win total. For instance..say Tom Brady goes down in the first exhibition game with another knee injury. You can bet that the Pats won't be listed at 11.5. Same for the Colts and Manning.

That is why I said I was not happy about the number of overs I bet on.

Actually, you don't even need to use perceived injuries as a reason.

The reason overs are a more damgerous bet EVERY year is the fact that there are only 256 wins available each NFL season, so, if you add up the wins, or overs at your sportsbook, you'll find the great majority of the time the number is higher than 256, sometimes quite a bit higher.

More wins than 256 just isn't going to happen.

[Bigfist]

Just to add a little comment. In general, especially with the NFL, I think unders are a bit safer than overs. The numbers are posted, assuming all key players stay healthy. An injury during the preseason can and do affect the posted win total. For instance..say Tom Brady goes down in the first exhibition game with another knee injury. You can bet that the Pats won't be listed at 11.5. Same for the Colts and Manning.

That is why I said I was not happy about the number of overs I bet on.

Actually, you don't even need to use perceived injuries as a reason.

The reason overs are a more damgerous bet EVERY year is the fact that there are only 256 wins available each NFL season, so, if you add up the wins, or overs at your sportsbook, you'll find the great majority of the time the number is higher than 256, sometimes quite a bit higher.

More wins than 256 just isn't going to happen.

What you say is exactly right. However, one has to also factor in the vig. when making a decision whether to make a bet or not. For instance...if Atlanta had been over 8.5 (-125), that is not a bet I would have made.
If St. Louis had been under 5.5 (+100), that is another I would have passed on. The only one I laid a big vig on was San Diego at over 9.5 (-170). I could have bet over 10 (-110)...those numbers are essentially equal.

[leadpipe]

Just to add a little comment. In general, especially with the NFL, I think unders are a bit safer than overs. The numbers are posted, assuming all key players stay healthy. An injury during the preseason can and do affect the posted win total. For instance..say Tom Brady goes down in the first exhibition game with another knee injury. You can bet that the Pats won't be listed at 11.5. Same for the Colts and Manning.

That is why I said I was not happy about the number of overs I bet on.

Actually, you don't even need to use perceived injuries as a reason.

The reason overs are a more damgerous bet EVERY year is the fact that there are only 256 wins available each NFL season, so, if you add up the wins, or overs at your sportsbook, you'll find the great majority of the time the number is higher than 256, sometimes quite a bit higher.

More wins than 256 just isn't going to happen.

What you say is exactly right. However, one has to also factor in the vig. when making a decision whether to make a bet or not. For instance...if Atlanta had been over 8.5 (-125), that is not a bet I would have made.
If St. Louis had been under 5.5 (+100), that is another I would have passed on. The only one I laid a big vig on was San Diego at over 9.5 (-170). I could have bet over 10 (-110)...those numbers are essentially equal.

Well, if one isn't factoring in the vig, they shouldn't be gambling.

By the way, this is why the over/under wins or losses wagers are the ones one should be playing if they want to delve into NFL futures. Playing a team that is "15-1" to win the Super Bowls is generally a poor wager, because of ENORMOUS vig.

If you go to your book and add up all the %'s such as the aforementioned 15-1 (.06%) These should naturally add up to 100%, if it was fair. You'll see by doing this just how gross the house edge is on these bets.

[pup]

Just to add a little comment. In general, especially with the NFL, I think unders are a bit safer than overs. The numbers are posted, assuming all key players stay healthy. An injury during the preseason can and do affect the posted win total. For instance..say Tom Brady goes down in the first exhibition game with another knee injury. You can bet that the Pats won't be listed at 11.5. Same for the Colts and Manning.

That is why I said I was not happy about the number of overs I bet on.

Actually, you don't even need to use perceived injuries as a reason.

The reason overs are a more damgerous bet EVERY year is the fact that there are only 256 wins available each NFL season, so, if you add up the wins, or overs at your sportsbook, you'll find the great majority of the time the number is higher than 256, sometimes quite a bit higher.

More wins than 256 just isn't going to happen.

OK. So if my math is correct, the above totals add up to 253. Does one need to add to that total for it to make sense? So if a team is 8.5, should it be counted as 9 wins? And if a team is 8, does it also need to count as 9?

And if this is true, isn't there also 256 losses? So wouldn't the same math apply?

Talk to me Lead.

[leadpipe]

Just to add a little comment. In general, especially with the NFL, I think unders are a bit safer than overs. The numbers are posted, assuming all key players stay healthy. An injury during the preseason can and do affect the posted win total. For instance..say Tom Brady goes down in the first exhibition game with another knee injury. You can bet that the Pats won't be listed at 11.5. Same for the Colts and Manning.

That is why I said I was not happy about the number of overs I bet on.

Actually, you don't even need to use perceived injuries as a reason.

The reason overs are a more damgerous bet EVERY year is the fact that there are only 256 wins available each NFL season, so, if you add up the wins, or overs at your sportsbook, you'll find the great majority of the time the number is higher than 256, sometimes quite a bit higher.

More wins than 256 just isn't going to happen.

OK. So if my math is correct, the above totals add up to 253. Does one need to add to that total for it to make sense? So if a team is 8.5, should it be counted as 9 wins? And if a team is 8, does it also need to count as 9?

And if this is true, isn't there also 256 losses? So wouldn't the same math apply?

Talk to me Lead.

No, if your total is 253, it simply means that the book has left 3 wins out on the table, in other words, there are positive EV bets out on the overs in this case.

As a rule, in the last several years the number is usually around 260 - three years ago I saw as high as 264 on one site. 8 extra wins is a ton of wins. Now, in the case of three years ago you still could not blindly wager the unders, because of the vig, which is usually about a 30 cent margin. But again, definitely postive EV wagers on some unders that year.

The best way to evaluate these is to rate every game - and not in the way many reporters, commentators or "experts" do it. Get the schedule out and assign a percentage. In other words don't mark the Browns opener either a win or loss. Assign it what % you believe the Browns have in winning that game. So, if you feel the Browns have a 30% chance, they get 30, the Vikings get 70%. Do this for the entire schedule, and then each 100% is equal to a win.

Absolutes do not exist in football. A team that is a favorite in every game is not expected to go 16-0. Forget certanties, concentrate on probabilities.

So, Pup, if everything was on the level you's come up at exactly 256, but this usually isn't the case. Also 256 is the MAXIMUM amount of wins, it is not the max amount of losses, because in the event of a tie, while no win is awarded, essentially an extra loss is, because nobody is given credit for a win against the number in that game.

[pup]

Word.

[Bigfist]

Just to add a little comment. In general, especially with the NFL, I think unders are a bit safer than overs. The numbers are posted, assuming all key players stay healthy. An injury during the preseason can and do affect the posted win total. For instance..say Tom Brady goes down in the first exhibition game with another knee injury. You can bet that the Pats won't be listed at 11.5. Same for the Colts and Manning.

That is why I said I was not happy about the number of overs I bet on.

Actually, you don't even need to use perceived injuries as a reason.

The reason overs are a more damgerous bet EVERY year is the fact that there are only 256 wins available each NFL season, so, if you add up the wins, or overs at your sportsbook, you'll find the great majority of the time the number is higher than 256, sometimes quite a bit higher.

More wins than 256 just isn't going to happen.

One thing that might be interesting to do, although too late for me this year, is to go to a place like the M or one of Luckys sportsbooks in Vegas and convert the spreads into the money line (easy to do), then convert that to the probability of each team winning a game (again easy) and then adding the percentages up and see if there are positive EV bets using this formula. I choose Luckys and the M, because both have every game for the season lined right now, before the season actually starts. Those lines, of course, will change during the course of the season, but it is possible to bet right now on, for instance, the Oakland/Cleveland game in week 16.

[leadpipe]

Just to add a little comment. In general, especially with the NFL, I think unders are a bit safer than overs. The numbers are posted, assuming all key players stay healthy. An injury during the preseason can and do affect the posted win total. For instance..say Tom Brady goes down in the first exhibition game with another knee injury. You can bet that the Pats won't be listed at 11.5. Same for the Colts and Manning.

That is why I said I was not happy about the number of overs I bet on.

Actually, you don't even need to use perceived injuries as a reason.

The reason overs are a more damgerous bet EVERY year is the fact that there are only 256 wins available each NFL season, so, if you add up the wins, or overs at your sportsbook, you'll find the great majority of the time the number is higher than 256, sometimes quite a bit higher.

More wins than 256 just isn't going to happen.

One thing that might be interesting to do, although too late for me this year, is to go to a place like the M or one of Luckys sportsbooks in Vegas and convert the spreads into the money line (easy to do), then convert that to the probability of each team winning a game (again easy) and then adding the percentages up and see if there are positive EV bets using this formula. I choose Luckys and the M, because both have every game for the season lined right now, before the season actually starts. Those lines, of course, will change during the course of the season, but it is possible to bet right now on, for instance, the Oakland/Cleveland game in week 16.

I wondered about this a few years back. The Las Vegas Club in downtown Vegas did this several years ago. Always wondered about their methods, but never had the time to figure out what they had going on. You know they had a nice house edge figured out based on popularity of teams, overall vigs etc. Would be interesting to know.

[Bigfist]

My gosh..I thought I was the only non local guy who went to the Las Vegas Club sportsbook!!! I used to LOVE that place..odor and all. The people who hung out there were different (!) than say at the Bellagio. I was really disappointed when it closed, and now they use that area for some live music during the week. At one time, the Vegas Club was the only place I know in Vegas that one could parlay run lines in baseball with totals.

[swerb]

Early leans ...

Bears over 9
Bengals over 7
Saints over 9.5
Giants over 9.5

Jags under 8
Dolphins under 7.5
Falcons under 8.5

[rebelwithoutaclue]

I made the following bets in Vegas a few weeks ago..can't believe I made so many!

Pats, over 11.5 (-115)
Packers, over 8.5 (-120)
Browns, over 6.5 (-110)
Tampa, under 6 (+120)
Seattle, under 8 (+100)
Atlanta, over 8.5 (+100)
Rams, under 5.5 (+145)
Bills, under 7.5 (+115)
Jets, under 7 (+125)
Chargers, over 9.5 (-170)

Way more than I usually do. Not thrilled with so many overs (5), but that is how I saw it!

I don't think I could ever bet an over on the Browns unless it's low like 3.5 or they have a string of good seasons. That's just asking for a double stomach-punch.

[Bigfist]

Well, I am going a bit with the zig-zag when it comes to the Browns. When it comes to betting, I throw my heart out the window and go with my head, which isn't all that great at times either. Last year, the Browns were variously listed at 8.5 or 9, depending on where you looked, and I bet under. I thought, at best, 8-8, and more likely 7-9. They were way worse than I thought they would be.

This year, I am expecting 8 wins...and that leaves me a little cushion. At least it will give me even more reason to be upset on Sundays this fall.

[leadpipe]

My gosh..I thought I was the only non local guy who went to the Las Vegas Club sportsbook!!! I used to LOVE that place..odor and all. The people who hung out there were different (!) than say at the Bellagio. I was really disappointed when it closed, and now they use that area for some live music during the week. At one time, the Vegas Club was the only place I know in Vegas that one could parlay run lines in baseball with totals.

Don't forget the special days/hours when they ran baseball on the nickel line.

The LVC book was a gem.

It's true what they say - Vegas will never be the same now that the corporations run the town.

[Bigfist]

My gosh..I thought I was the only non local guy who went to the Las Vegas Club sportsbook!!! I used to LOVE that place..odor and all. The people who hung out there were different (!) than say at the Bellagio. I was really disappointed when it closed, and now they use that area for some live music during the week. At one time, the Vegas Club was the only place I know in Vegas that one could parlay run lines in baseball with totals.

Don't forget the special days/hours when they ran baseball on the nickel line.

The LVC book was a gem.

It's true what they say - Vegas will never be the same now that the corporations run the town.

You are so right..I had forgotten that. I don't think we will see a sportsbook like the LVC again.

I guess I can add this now, but there used to be a pretty fat guy that worked in the LVC sportsbook that would let you bet into really stale lines if you tipped him. In basketball, you could bet, say UNC -3 over NC St., even if the line had moved from 3 to 6 during the day, and 6 was the line at the time I would make a bet! It made for some great middles, and all it took was a ten dollar tip to this guy. Not sure how he was able to get the ticket to say UNC -3, but he could.

[mrburns]

Lovin' me some Buffalo under 7.5 for +120. The only line I've bet so far.

[swerb]

This is what I went with in the pool I'm in ...

Gold – Green Bay over 8.5
Silver – San Diego over 9.5
Bronze – Buffalo under 8

Chicago over 8.5
Cincinnati over 6.5
Tampa Bay under 6.5
Philadelphia over 9.5
Atlanta over 8.5
Tennessee under 9
Oakland under 6

[Bigfist]

I made the following bets in Vegas a few weeks ago..can't believe I made so many!

Pats, over 11.5 (-115)
Packers, over 8.5 (-120)
Browns, over 6.5 (-110)
Tampa, under 6 (+120)
Seattle, under 8 (+100)
Atlanta, over 8.5 (+100)
Rams, under 5.5 (+145)
Bills, under 7.5 (+115)
Jets, under 7 (+125)
Chargers, over 9.5 (-170)

Way more than I usually do. Not thrilled with so many overs (5), but that is how I saw it!

Results:

Pats over 11.5 (-115) L...-1.15 units
Packers over 8.5 (-120) W...+ 1 unit
Browns over 6.5 (-110) L...-1.1 units
Tampa under 6 (+120) W...+1.2 units
Seattle under 8 (+100) W...+1 unit
Atlanta over 8.5 (+100) W...+1 unit
Rams under 5.5 (+145) W...+1.45 units
Bills under 7.5 (+115) W...+1.15 units
Jets under 7 (+125) L...-1 unit
Chargers over 9.5 (-170) W...+1 unit

Went 7-3, +4.55 units

[swerb]

This is what I went with in the pool I'm in ...

Gold – Green Bay over 8.5
Silver – San Diego over 9.5
Bronze – Buffalo under 8

Chicago over 8.5
Cincinnati over 6.5
Tampa Bay under 6.5
Philadelphia over 9.5
Atlanta over 8.5
Tennessee under 9
Oakland under 6

I hit 9 of my 10 this year. Won this pool going away.

Only loser - Da Bears. Hit every other one.

[mrburns]

The only one I ended up taking was Buffalo under 7.5. For the second season in a row, the Billskis come through with the under.