4.5 point favorites over UCLA

'SkersRule said:
tschu said:
Lines aren't determined by some mythical group of guys running things in Vegas...the initial ones are set by experts and then move according to the action on them. The reason that lines are usually a good thing to look at is that contrary to what people believe, the lines don't move because of public or fan money (As in, a bunch of cornhusker fans betting on Nebraska isn't the reason a line would move in our favor). The main reason they move is that most of the money on these games is placed by extremely informed betting sharps who make their living (or a ton of money aside from a regular job perhaps) betting on sports. Looks like the line has already moved from 4.5 to 5.5 which tells you something I guess.

Don't forget that the game is at UCLA which is essentially 3 points in their favor over what it would be on a neutral field.
Click to expand...
Actually the Vegas lines moves up or down to ensure relatively equal betting on both sides so that no matter which team loses the "house" always wins.

Which means that if a bunch of Husker fans are placing bets on a 4.5 spread it goes up to get people to place bets on UCLA.
Click to expand...
Well duh. What I was referring to is the source of the money. The bulk of money going into these sportsbooks is not from casual fans. It comes from pro betting sharps. Obviously the line moves when money starts going towards one side and the books need to get action on the other side. But you always hear, "Oh, Nebraska fans (for example) must be betting this one hard for the line to be like that!" ...which is almost never the reason for a line moving. It's the betting sharps who are looking for any edge that they think a line gives them. They find an edge, exploit it, then the line has to move.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just to qualify where I'm coming from, I don't even bet, but I have 15k posts on the sports part of a gambling forum...you learn a thing or two after awhile. Sad but true.

 
I would take us to cover up to 21, but that could be just blind homerism.

UCLA really, really didn't look good. Still, it's hard to make sense of USM, as well, with their whole new staff and system. I just hope our performance against USM is representative of what we can do on our best days, and that we perform at least above average against that metric.

Either way, I think Nebraska rolls. UCLA is in a long extended period of darkness. While it is slightly brighter this year, it is far from over.

 
tschu said:
'SkersRule said:
tschu said:
Lines aren't determined by some mythical group of guys running things in Vegas...the initial ones are set by experts and then move according to the action on them. The reason that lines are usually a good thing to look at is that contrary to what people believe, the lines don't move because of public or fan money (As in, a bunch of cornhusker fans betting on Nebraska isn't the reason a line would move in our favor). The main reason they move is that most of the money on these games is placed by extremely informed betting sharps who make their living (or a ton of money aside from a regular job perhaps) betting on sports. Looks like the line has already moved from 4.5 to 5.5 which tells you something I guess.

Don't forget that the game is at UCLA which is essentially 3 points in their favor over what it would be on a neutral field.
Click to expand...
Actually the Vegas lines moves up or down to ensure relatively equal betting on both sides so that no matter which team loses the "house" always wins.

Which means that if a bunch of Husker fans are placing bets on a 4.5 spread it goes up to get people to place bets on UCLA.
Click to expand...
Well duh. What I was referring to is the source of the money. The bulk of money going into these sportsbooks is not from casual fans. It comes from pro betting sharps. Obviously the line moves when money starts going towards one side and the books need to get action on the other side. But you always hear, "Oh, Nebraska fans (for example) must be betting this one hard for the line to be like that!" ...which is almost never the reason for a line moving. It's the betting sharps who are looking for any edge that they think a line gives them. They find an edge, exploit it, then the line has to move.
Click to expand...
I'd be shocked if the majority of source money you're talking about really comes from the "sharps." I can see the initial line being set by the "sharps" as a baseline. But I think the line, and majority of money involved, comes from the average fan. Just my opinion though...no idear if I'm right, wrong, or somewhere in-between.

 
Haha, I used to think the same thing. But read my short post above. Ive learned a lot about sports gambling from some really smart people (although I don't plan on getting into that anytime soon, lol)

(The initial line is set by a bunch of experts that work for the sportsbooks and try to do their best to gauge the way the action will fall. They usually do a really good job, but guessing what line will get the best action on both sides is a pretty inexact science so that's why you see the lines often move a point or two right after they come out)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Apparently UCLA scored three times on 70+ yd runs. I know our D is a work in progress be we can't be as bad as that. UCLA also returned a fumble for a TD. I'd say if we don't shoot ourselves in the foot repeatedly, we should be good to cover.

 
tschu said:
Haha, I used to think the same thing. But read my short post above. Ive learned a lot about sports gambling from some really smart people (although I don't plan on getting into that anytime soon, lol)

(The initial line is set by a bunch of experts that work for the sportsbooks and try to do their best to gauge the way the action will fall. They usually do a really good job, but guessing what line will get the best action on both sides is a pretty inexact science so that's why you see the lines often move a point or two right after they come out)
Click to expand...
I'm by no means a gambling expert but, from what I understand, you are correct. Hard to believe but correct.

 
tschu said:
Lines aren't determined by some mythical group of guys running things in Vegas...the initial ones are set by experts and then move according to the action on them. The reason that lines are usually a good thing to look at is that contrary to what people believe, the lines don't move because of public or fan money (As in, a bunch of cornhusker fans betting on Nebraska isn't the reason a line would move in our favor). The main reason they move is that most of the money on these games is placed by extremely informed betting sharps who make their living (or a ton of money aside from a regular job perhaps) betting on sports. Looks like the line has already moved from 4.5 to 5.5 which tells you something I guess.

Don't forget that the game is at UCLA which is essentially 3 points in their favor over what it would be on a neutral field.
Click to expand...
You nailed it right on the head, take the bama Michigan line for example. With bovada, the line was set early at 14 points and as the week moved along and people placed bets for Michigan to cover, the line slightly moved down to 13 1/2 right before kickoff. Fortunately for me, I took bama and unlike Mayweather, I will not have to pay out $3 million.

 
Not surprised by this line. Our best player is likely not playing. We are on the road. UCLA has a good RB and mobile QB...two things we don't defend well. Mora Jr. is hanging his hat on this game...if they beat us, he gets major pub and puts UCLA back on the national scene. TMart had a great game but I am not expecting another 5 TD performance. So. Miss had some plays they just flat out dropped that would have been huge...this will not happen with UCLA. We have our work cut out for us no doubt. I loved that we did not turn the ball over in game one. If we finish in the negative in turnover ratio in this game, it will not be good.

I hope we take the Bruins very seriously...they are hungry. I'd like to see the type of performance when we went to Washington and played lights out...not the second game where Washington controlled the game in the Holiday Bowl. If there was one of those games on the schedule that we should have won but lost (seems like there is one every year), this one is a good candidate. I'm not taking this game lightly and think it will be very close.

 
tschu said:
Haha, I used to think the same thing. But read my short post above. Ive learned a lot about sports gambling from some really smart people (although I don't plan on getting into that anytime soon, lol)

(The initial line is set by a bunch of experts that work for the sportsbooks and try to do their best to gauge the way the action will fall. They usually do a really good job, but guessing what line will get the best action on both sides is a pretty inexact science so that's why you see the lines often move a point or two right after they come out)
Click to expand...
I've been repeatedly accused of being smart-an accusation I still deny.

default_loltartar.gif


 
Haspula said:
If we learn how to defend mobile QBs then this game wont be close
Click to expand...
I was thinking the same thing when I first looked at their box score but now I'm not sure how mobile he is. Obviously you have to be decent to score on a 72 yard run but Rice did about everything as wrong as they could - they gave up three 70+ yard runs. After that, he had six other rushing attempts for minus-four yards. I'm sure there were at least a couple sacks in there but that part doesn't exactly look scary.

Of course, if you can hand it to a guy going for 200+, you don't need your QB to do too much.

 
I'd take it if it was 17. Maybe more. Before the season started I was more worried about USM. Nothing UCLA or Nebraska did made me think that was wrong.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top