Houston texans and losing teams.

[bluffski]

Here is what I do not understand about the all the wagers made on the texans last week. I think you guys had way too much turkey. Why would anyone put there money on a consistent loser throughout the season. A team who has won only 1 game will find a way to lose. They will disappoint. Id rather not even bet the game than bet on a team that has won only won 1 game in the entire season. There is a big difference between betting on a team that has a losing record and a team that just completely finds a way to lose. You just dont go 1-9 without finding a way to lose. Guess what, thats what they did. they found a way to screw it up. Again and again and again. I personally will not make any bets on a team that has no shot at the playoffs coming up. I will, however, like teams that need to win and are getting points. These systems that some of you use. Does your system take these items into account, or are your systems purely statistical. Here's a statistic I would like to see for the upcoming games: X Team ATS when having to win to keep playoff hopes alive/clinch/homefield durin playoffs/be wild card

1) Saint Louis' defense is terrible as the 1st half proved.
2) Teams that allow 40 points in the previous game, as Houston did, cover at a good clip in the following game (improved focus).
3) The Rams ran for 6 YARDS in week 11 against a weak Ariz D.

The StL middle linebacker made an incredible INT on the Saint Louis 10 early in the 2nd half to prevent another Texans score. Without that play, I don't think Saint Louis has any chance to win this game or send it to OT and maybe we wouldn't be having this conversation (although I think it's important anyway). Lots and lots of things fell into place for StL to cover.

I don't regret this play regardless of the result.

Edit: And lastly, the Texans playing in front of their home crowd is usually strong enough motivation for any team to play its best. I think it's silly to argue teams have little motivation to win without playoff hopes. These are careers on the line every Sunday.

[Easy E]

Simple enough. The bookies and sports books in Vegas don't stay in business by giving out bad lines regularly. You can't tell me you'd expect 20-point swings, and 10 points in less than a minute, for most teams without a huge talent gap.
Therefore, betting on the Texans with the spread, at home, is not necessarily a "bad" play. It doesn't matter if they lose, it matters if they lose by more than the spread. If the Rams had won by a FG in OT, you wouldn't be making this post.

I picked against the Texans myself, but felt very lucky to collect on that bet.

You're absolutely right. Anyone that watched the Texans all year could have seen that ending coming. I've been telling people all year about Ryan Fitzpatrick, but no one would listen. The thing is, I knew the Texans were so bad, they would find a way to lose by more than a FG too. The Rams were such an easy bet in that game with a two game losing streak as a road favorite with Jamie Martin starting. The result shows just how stupid all of us were for taking the Texans.

[Easy E]

[ QUOTE ]
You're absolutely right. Anyone that watched the Texans all year could have seen that ending coming. I've been telling people all year about Ryan Fitzpatrick, but no one would listen. The thing is, I knew the Texans were so bad, they would find a way to lose by more than a FG too. The Rams were such an easy bet in that game with a two game losing streak as a road favorite with Jamie Martin starting. The result shows just how stupid all of us were for taking the Texans.

[/ QUOTE ]

No you did not. I guess it was stupid to also take the Texans:

- on the road against the Colts, the Jaguars, and the Bengals
- as home favorites against the Browns

"The Rams were such an easy bet in that game " If you seriously believe that....


This is another example of "WPT Sports handicapping" when the stupid play is sooooo obvious, after you've seen everyone's hand.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're absolutely right. Anyone that watched the Texans all year could have seen that ending coming. I've been telling people all year about Ryan Fitzpatrick, but no one would listen. The thing is, I knew the Texans were so bad, they would find a way to lose by more than a FG too. The Rams were such an easy bet in that game with a two game losing streak as a road favorite with Jamie Martin starting. The result shows just how stupid all of us were for taking the Texans.

[/ QUOTE ]

No you did not. I guess it was stupid to also take the Texans:

- on the road against the Colts, the Jaguars, and the Bengals
- as home favorites against the Browns

"The Rams were such an easy bet in that game " If you seriously believe that....


This is another example of "WPT Sports handicapping" when the stupid play is sooooo obvious, after you've seen everyone's hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

He was speaking tongue in cheek, Easy.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're absolutely right. Anyone that watched the Texans all year could have seen that ending coming. I've been telling people all year about Ryan Fitzpatrick, but no one would listen. The thing is, I knew the Texans were so bad, they would find a way to lose by more than a FG too. The Rams were such an easy bet in that game with a two game losing streak as a road favorite with Jamie Martin starting. The result shows just how stupid all of us were for taking the Texans.

[/ QUOTE ]

No you did not. I guess it was stupid to also take the Texans:

- on the road against the Colts, the Jaguars, and the Bengals
- as home favorites against the Browns

"The Rams were such an easy bet in that game " If you seriously believe that....


This is another example of "WPT Sports handicapping" when the stupid play is sooooo obvious, after you've seen everyone's hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

He was speaking tongue in cheek, Easy.

[/ QUOTE ]

As if he couldn't tell by the I've been telling people all year about Ryan Fitzpatrick, but no one would listen. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Easy E]

Cranky this morning, I guess- I completely missed that line.

I take it back, MinRaise- I'm an idiot /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[Sluss]

[ QUOTE ]
I've been telling people all year about Ryan Fitzpatrick, but no one would listen.

[/ QUOTE ] By the way, you know you have done waaaay too much fantasy research when you were shocked Fitzpatrick beat out Jeff Smoker for the third QB spot and then dug through enough articles on the Rams to find out that Martz loved him and really thought he could have a great career in the NFL. Which to me, really put the kiss of death on the rest of his career and made me not think about drafting him in a dynasty league. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Ken_AA]

[ QUOTE ]
Here is what I do not understand about the all the wagers made on the texans last week. I think you guys had way too much turkey. Why would anyone put there money on a consistent loser throughout the season. A team who has won only 1 game will find a way to lose. They will disappoint. Id rather not even bet the game than bet on a team that has won only won 1 game in the entire season. There is a big difference between betting on a team that has a losing record and a team that just completely finds a way to lose. You just dont go 1-9 without finding a way to lose. Guess what, thats what they did. they found a way to screw it up. Again and again and again. I personally will not make any bets on a team that has no shot at the playoffs coming up. I will, however, like teams that need to win and are getting points. These systems that some of you use. Does your system take these items into account, or are your systems purely statistical. Here's a statistic I would like to see for the upcoming games: X Team ATS when having to win to keep playoff hopes alive/clinch/homefield durin playoffs/be wild card

[/ QUOTE ]

OH MY GOD YOUR SOOOOO RIGHT!!!! I NEVER HAVE TO WORK ANOTHER DAY IN MY LIFE NOW!!! I'LL JUST BET ON TEAMS THAT HAVE A TON TO PLAY FOR LIKE THE 4 AND 6 RAMS ON THE ROAD!!!!

Ken

Lol, no problem Easy, I've been guilty of a poor sarcasm detector at times here too. I was laughing at the sports bar at the irony of losing this bet. I had the under too which went up in flames with that TD when it was 27-17. Good thing I was home for Thanksgiving because anything I bet last weekend was destined for failure.

[bluffski]

So the responders who posted. Your telling me in your handicapping you dont take into consideration a team playing for something more than the regular season? You dont take into account a team that has had plenty of chances to win games but find ways to lose in the end during the season? Of course I do not just see whose playing for a playoff spot or clinch homefield, division etc... and bet just on that factor. However, I think completely ignoring it and relying only on statistics from the past is not quite correct either. To me, ignoring that would be like ignoring tommy maddox starting for the steelers. Another question I have is does anyone do statistical observation on teams in the past 10 years who have covered ats when playing for more the regular season ie playoff spots, homfield adv, division clinch games, wildcard berths.

Do you not think the line accounted for the fact that the Rams were "playing for something"? 1-9 last 10 road games, one of the 5 worst defenses in the NFL, *Jamie Martin* at QB, yet they were giving 3.5 (I assume you know the difference between giving 2.5 and 3.5). The more I read what you're saying, the more I doubt we'd be having this conversation if the Texans had covered.

You seem to think teams that are out of the playoff race "give up". This isn't high school or sub-division 1 football, these men are playing for their careers every Sunday. Why did the 1-7 Texans cover 17.5 at the 8-0 Colts in week 10? or the 1-6 Texans almost beat the 4-3 Jags straight up at Jax? Continue cherry-picking cases to make your point, it really enhances your credibility.

[eggzz]

I finished second last year in the handicapping contest here, and if you look back at many of my bets, you will see that they were populated by teams like the Texans, Bears, Tampa - I don't really remember who all of the really bad teams were - point is, thats who I consistently found myself playing, as opposed to the Indys and the Steelers week after week.

I stayed away from the games that were in the public spotlight and concentrated on these lesser matchups. Maybe that steered me away from more trap lines, who knows. (When I say trap lines, I refer to the more scrutinized matchups among teams that the public likes to bet. I believe these are sometimes sharper and harder to figure out, so I steer away from these types of games). All I know is that I'm in the top ten (I think) again this year, and the Texans and the Niners were plays of mine this week. My first losing week in about six.

You have to look at all the games on the board, and whittle them down to a handful that you think provides value versus the line. You also can't get caught up in the teams that "must win". Did you bet San Diego this week because they just had to win against Washington? Well if you did, you got as lucky as the Rams bettors did this week. I stayed far away from that game, but had I bet it, I would have ended up on the losing side.

One thing I have learned from years of ups and downs betting this game is, you have to take what a team did last week with a grain of salt when you are trying to figure out how they are going to play this week. Case in point - Miami Dolphins. I had the Raiders teased, and I had the Raiders in a 5 teamer, all they had to do was win. How could they not win at home, against a team that got shut out by the Browns? I'll tell you how, because that was last week, and they were able to wipe that pitiful performance out of their minds right quick. Looking back at that bet, I should have listened to my gut more. There was obviously a reason why I only put the Raiders in a tease and in a parlay on the money line. Why was I so worried about the cover? They should have killed Miami. But they didn't. So even though I should have known better, I still couldn't resist. (Hey, even good handicappers are going to lose more than 40% of their selections!)

I'll tell you what. Looking hard at the Titans this week.

3-8 versus 11-0.

Sure, why not.

It is the NFL.

Good luck

[bluffski]

Ok again i ask does anyone do statistical observation on specific teams (in the past 5-10 years) who have covered ats when playing for more the regular season ie playoff spots, homfield adv, division clinch games, wildcard berths. In other words does the specific team cover the line more, less, or same. It is difficult for me to disagree with some of your point because they do seem valid, but my feeling from your posts is you dont give too much credit to factors such as these. your point on these people are playing for their jobs just doesnt sit to well with me. Why do you think home team lines are moved 3 points either way most of the time. Its because the people playin are human. Motivation plays a big factor in football. Whether it be getting home faster, not having to travel, fan support etc... The nba shows this. Look at regular season vs playoff games. Im not trying to pick on just this houston game. If you want lets look at some games in the coming weeks with the same criteria. Examples would be the bucs/saints, bears/packers, ravens/texans, patriots/jets. With the bucs/saints game as the 1 i would look at as most similar.

[ QUOTE ]
my feeling from your posts is you dont give too much credit to factors such as these.

[/ QUOTE ]

You underestimate how often the line accounts for the factors you mention.

Also, I was responding to this which you wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
Your telling me in your handicapping you dont take into consideration a team playing for something more than the regular season? You dont take into account a team that has had plenty of chances to win games but find ways to lose in the end during the season?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have trends that determine what you're looking for but goldsheet.com may be a good place to start.

[ QUOTE ]
your point on these people are playing for their jobs just doesnt sit to well with me. Why do you think home team lines are moved 3 points either way most of the time. Its because the people playin are human.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're going to have to explain this a little further.

[OrianasDaad]

Wow, I just realized what a donk I am. I took the Chargers AND the Rams last week! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

I routinely bet against the worst teams. It's doing well for me, but this is my first venture into sports betting, and making 48 picks with a plus score doesn't mean squat.

I'm taking three road favorites this week. The teams that I'm betting against are the 49ers, Browns, Jets and Lions.

I'd bet that alot of beginners look at sports-betting the same way that I do. Not much in the way of stats. No real knowledge of strategy. Just picking good teams to do what they do well. (OK, I'm taking the Cardinals this week, so sue me.)

I'll learn more in the offseason, and even more next season, and maybe I'll become a better handicapper. Right now it's just fun.

Lastly, as a 10 year casual NFL fan, I've never seen a team not show up and at least try to win. I'm a Colts fan, and boy they used to be able to screw good things up pretty bad, but I don't think they every stopped trying to win. The Lions, on the other hand...

Not much content here in my post. Just want to offer a perspective from a beginning handicapper.

[bluffski]

in your previous post you say that I underestimate how often the line accounts for the factors you mention. The factors being motivation for winning and playing up to the team's potential. So then motivation for playing good is a factor in the line. If motivation is a factor in the line then what if any do you put in your system a team's motivation for winning. If you do not have past historical references to this like I was referring to (5-10 years ats playoff chance etc) then how can you tell whether or not the line being given is a true line when you compare it to what your system says. The following is an explanation you were asking for. I was stating that all players dont simply play their complete best in fear of losing their jobs. There are outside determining factors that need to be taken into consideration as to whether a player or a team is going to play his best on any given day. Remember, however, some of the factors below might even make a player or team play better as when they are on the field they can actually block out all the other stuff. I stated playoff race as one. Here are a few more. Is he sick, injured, death in family, drug problem, fight with the wife, caught cheating on wife, baby coming, friend hospitalized, friend dying, doesnt like teammates, doesnt like coach, is upset with his contract, legal problems, doenst like how many times hes getting the ball, traveling a big road trip, doesnt like flying, homesick, someone in family hospitalized And so on and so forth. I was simply rebutting the statement these guys are professional and they are in fear of losing there jobs so theyre going to play at their best no matter what is simply wrong. Man whoever could write a statistical database not only for this and pure statistical data for teams and then a program to sort all of this data please let me know

[bluffski]

ps I like your reports everyweek. Very easy to look thru with notations of week posts. Although I dont like to use teasers, I do like some of your straight bets, and when I dont like them I at least try to figure out why you did.

[ QUOTE ]
Just picking good teams to do what they do well.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're on exactly the right path OD (I don't say this in a condescending way, you are doing much better than me this year) but the trick is knowing which teams will be good, week in, week out, and in what situations. In 2005, virtually no teams have emerged as good that were not already considered good by Week 4/5, nor few that are bad now which were considered good earlier on. This is historically rare and singlehandedly torpedoing my season.

[ QUOTE ]
So then motivation for playing good is a factor in the line. If motivation is a factor in the line then what if any do you put in your system a team's motivation for winning. If you do not have past historical references to this like I was referring to (5-10 years ats playoff chance etc) then how can you tell whether or not the line being given is a true line when you compare it to what your system says.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the line accounts for this motivation, as I believe the Rams/Texans line did, then there is no edge to be had and thus no reason to search for such trends. If my assumptions as wrong, then yes I do need to look at this more closely.

[ QUOTE ]
Here are a few more. Is he sick, injured, death in family, drug problem, fight with the wife, caught cheating on wife, baby coming, friend hospitalized, friend dying, doesnt like teammates, doesnt like coach, is upset with his contract, legal problems, doenst like how many times hes getting the ball, traveling a big road trip, doesnt like flying, homesick, someone in family hospitalized And so on and so forth. I was simply rebutting the statement these guys are professional and they are in fear of losing there jobs so theyre going to play at their best no matter what is simply wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

You make some good points. However, there are two reasons I think these points can be overrated or are accounted for in the line:

1) There are roughly 30 players on each team who participate in 30+% of the snaps in an NFL game. You're absolutely right that distractions can make a player lose focus, but what if there are an equal number of these 30 players on each team, thus mitigating these effects? With our limited knowledge, it's nearly impossible for us to know which players are negatively impacted. Still, I think this number is relatively small -- these men are paid big money to perform their jobs, which take place over the course of just 48 hours (16 games x 3 hours) per year. Having played amateur sports (basketball) at a serious level, let alone professional, I can not imagine a huge portion of 30 players not getting geared up for a game, unless all of them have caught the same flu bug or what have you. In the end, you're left with a situation you cannot turn to your advantage unless you have lots of information about a large percentage of regulars on one team.

2) There is one player on each team who has an extremely disproportionate impact on the outcome of an NFL game -- the quarterback. Having special information about the QB not accounted for in the line can be extremely valuable. Most of the time, however, this information is not special and instead publicly available.

In the end, while there are innumerable focus/motivation factors that impact an NFL game, many of which you mention, most are accounted for in the line.

Also, I was wondering if you could answer this: "Why do you think home team lines are moved 3 points either way most of the time. Its because the people playin are human." I didn't quite understand what you meant.