2008 Week 3 Plays

.

2008 Week 3 Plays:

Ten -4.5
Chi -3
Buf -9.5

Week 3 Comment:

My system is up and running, but as it still is early, I am taking it into consideration but not blindly following it. The system is exceptionally good on certain totals, but there are no large plays this week.

Writeups:

Ten -4 (@ BetUS)
-4.5 (Elsewhere)

• Ten is 7-1 SU and 5-3 ATS at home off of back to back wins since 2002
• Home teams off a win and facing an opponent off of a 21+ point loss are 9-2 ATS and 10-1 SU since 2002.
• In the last 10 years, teams w/ a losing record who are off a bye and lost by 21+ prior to the bye who are underdogs in their next game are 3-8 ATS.
• If that team is a road dog, they are 1-5 ATS, losing by an average of 22 points and failing to cover by an average of 2 TDs.
• Houston is 0-4 and 1-3 ATS on the road off a 7+ point loss when playing a team in it's own division who has a winning record. They lose by an avg of 19 points and fail to cover by an avg of 8 points.
  

The only thing that draws hesitation is that the last 6 matchups by these two teams have been decided on average by 6.5 points. Ten has won all of them, but they have not been easy. However, 3 of those 6 games pitted Ten as the underdogs. The avg line for those 6 games was Ten -1.3 points. The largest line was Ten -6.5 which Ten failed to cover.

Linesmakers have added some wood to the line compared to the recent average, but it does not dissuade me from taking Ten in this spot. Of course, there is no real telling how Ike has affected the mentality of the team. DT Travis Johnson's house was destroyed, a tree crashed into defensive end Mario Williams' home, and a ceiling collapsed in one room of tight end Owen Daniels' house. I have read quotes where they will be "playing for the city", which we know what happened in the Saints first game after Katrina. However, I believe Ten will win and should cover the 4 to 4.5 point line.

Chi -3

• Chicago is 3-1 SU in Home Openers under Lovie Smith. In the 3 victories, they averaged 23 points more than their opponents and covered the spread on average by 16.5 points.
• Teams who lost as road dogs the week before, but were winning at the half, and are now home favorites against a team who won last week are 13-2 ATS since 2001.
• Teams who won 2 weeks ago and went away as road dogs the following week and lost but were winning at the half playing and are now home favorites against a team who won last week are 7-0 ATS since 2000.
• Under Gruden, Tampa Bay is 4-13 ATS on the road the week after a home win.
• If their opponent lost the week before, that number drops to 1-7 ATS
• Under Gruden, Tampa Bay is 2-4 ATS on a Sunday home opener for their opponent, and if a dog, 1-4 ATS.
• Under Gruden, Tampa Bay is 3-10 ATS vs. NFC teams outside their division and 4-9 SU. In their 9 losses, they lost by an avg of 9 points, and failed to cover as a dog in those losses by an avg of 3 points.
• Since 2003, Tampa Bay is 5-20 ATS on the road against non-divisional opponents, including 0-5 in 2007.
  

I think this game will be close and TB's defense is the reason. Some games I play because I believe a team will easily cover the spread. Others I play because I have a high confidence level that a team will cover the spread. The latter is one of those occasions. While I don't predict a lopsided and easy victory, I do think Chi will win this game by 4 or more points.

I am always a little leary on a -3 home line. Historically, it has not been kind to the favorite (2007 in particular). However, we'll lay the 3 and pull for the Bears to continue their run. As a side note, I do believe Lovie's familiarity with Griese's skill set and tendencies is more of an advantage to Chicago than Griese's familiarity with playing in Chicago and against the Chicago defense in practice is an advantage to Tampa Bay.

Buffalo -9.5

• Since 2001, the Raiders are 1-9 ATS the week before facing the rival Chargers.
• If playing a team outside their division, they are 0-6 ATS and 1-5 SU, losing by an avg of 16 and failing to cover by an avg of 17.
• If on the road, they are 0-5 SU and 1-4 ATS, losing by an average of 17 and failing to cover by an avg of 14.
• If they are underdogs, they are 0-4 SU and 1-3 ATS, losing by an avg of 24 and failing to cover by an avg of 16.
• Since 2001, the Raiders are 0-4 ATS and SU when playing a non-divisional sandwich game (previous team was in their division, next team is in their division, current team is not).
• The Raiders are 1-8 ATS when traveling to play another AFC team in the Eastern time zone since 2003.
• Since 1996, Buffalo is 7-1 ATS at home as a TD+ favorite after a win.
• In the last 2 years, Buffalo is 13-5-1 ATS after covering in their previous game, including 7-2 ATS at home.
  

Advice Only:

If you are taking the Buf/Oak Under, make sure you have 37!

This game was on my radar for a potential Under play, however, it would go against my system. So I am not playing it, but I just want to provide this advice to you if you are planning to play the Under:

In games where the total is lined between 34 and 39 (all games played where the total was equal to or between those numbers), the final score which was landed on more than any other was 37. Both teams combined to score 37 points roughly 4.9% of the time. Now you may look at that number and consider it to be small. However, think of this:

Both teams combined to score 39 points 1.2% of the time
Both teams combined to score 38 points 2.6% of the time
Both teams combined to score 36 points 2.1% of the time
Both teams combined to score 35 points 2.2% of the time

Therefore, having 37 would allow you to push on a number that occurs twice as often as 38, 36, or 35.

You having 36.5 will allow you to win on 36, but you lose on 37, which is twice as valuable than 36. Therefore, I highly recommend if you at all were contemplating playing this under, you take U 37. Again, this is not an official play, it is a recommendation if you do decide to play the Under in this game.