The NFL Week 12: What the Hell is Going on Around Here?

It's been an odd year so far. The Sports Guy's column today points out the number of road teams winning or covering is way out of whack. And by the way, how about that Sports Guy returning from two years of sucking to start writing decent columns again? Yet another positive to come out of the Brady injury. We've also seen favorites (usually the public's preferred team) covering at a much higher clip than normal. Since we usually favor dogs, this hasn't worked out so well. But these things tend to balance out in the end. Hopefully the balancing out will start this week, because we've got five plays that we like:

Tennessee Titans -6 +101 (Matchbook), 1 unit to win 1.1 units.

This game is -5 and -5.5 elsewhere with mild juice. I'm at work and can't run the line comparisions, but they all look about even to me, so take your pick. Titans are a better team on both sides of the ball, and it's not really all that close. I think this line is a function of people somehow talking themselves into the fact that the Titans can't possibly go 16-0, and this looks like as good a chance as any for them to lose, so it must be "time." Plus people seem to think that Brett Favre and the Jets are suddenly "clicking." About 60% on the Jets according to Wagerline. We'll take the Titans, and rest secure in the knowledge that the team we're fading is bound to throw a horrifying. back-breaking interception at least once this game. I think the Titans will make the Jets pay for that mistake in a way that the Chiefs and Bills could not.

Miami Dolphins -1 -103 (Matchbook), 1.03 units to win 1 unit.

This is the quintessential "last season bias" game. DVOA statistics show that they are better than the Patriots on both sides of the ball this year. And yet they are basically in a pick-em game in Miami? And 70% of Wagerline bettors are choosing the Pats? Why? Well, presumably because people don't realize just how different these teams are from the teams that went 1-15 and 16-0 last season. Heck, most people still don't realize how different the Pats team from the last half of 2007 was from the Pats team from the first half of 2007. Anyway, I love this play. The injury to Adalius Thomas is the injury that breaks the Pats' back, in my opinion.

Oakland Raiders +9 -110 (WSEX, BetUS), 1.1 units to win 1 unit.

Any time I see 9 or 9.5 point lines, I pay attention, because they look like classic sucker lines. The square bettor sees that line, thinks "that's just a touchdown and a field goal," and gets the favorite. I mentioned this on last week's Bengals-Eagles game as well, and that worked out OK, so we'll keep riding my new theory here. Denver's defense is as banged-up as any unit in the league. Ouch. I think a finally healthy McFadden's gonna put on a show here. Not enough of a show for us to play the money line, but a show nonetheless. Wagerline says 58% on the Broncos, which isn't really enough to be significant.

Seattle Seahawks +4 -110 (BetUS), 1.1 units to win 1 unit.

Ugh. I feel dirty fading my favorite team. Dear God, I hope I don't have to fade the public favorite Tarheels a lot this winter.

This game makes for an interesting study in contarian betting. It was originally on my list, because I thought people were ignoring the fact that most of the Seattle losses this year came with Hasslebeck injured and/or a decimated receiver corps, and thus the public was underestimating them based solely on a won-loss record that didn't reflect the quality of the team they'll field on Sunday. Then I chatted with Hambone and told him I was taking it off, because that sort of thinking (about the impact of Hasslebeck's absence) seemed like "square" thinking, because squares tend to overemphasize the importance of the QB when the team clearly has more problems than just QB play this year. Then Hambone pointed out that 68% of Wagerline is on the Skins, so it couldn't be too square. Sounds good to me. Other contarian types: feel free to share your thoughts with us.

By the way, the game was +3 +103 elsewhere last time I checked. Another candidate for a helpful commenter to run through the line comparison thingy.

Possible play: San Diego -3 +105 (WSEX)

Really, we just wanted to take advantage of this rare chance to play a favorite and fade overwhelming public sentiment at the same time. It almost never happens.

People seem to think the (6-4) Colts "got off to a slow start, but they've turned it around." Really? Find me a result since their Week 7 mauling of the Ravens that leads you to believe that. No, really. Go ahead. I'll wait.

We're not putting our money down here. The thought is that it's the late game on Sunday night, and we might well get some line movement in our favor since the squares are tripping over themselves to bet the Colts here. Plus if we go 4-0 or 0-4 during the day, we might want to cash in our chips or stop the bleeding, respectively. But we wanted to flag the game in our "official" NFL post. We'll post an update if we decide to play it.