Late-Season NFL Totals - Don't Be Biased

We're getting down to the last few weeks of the NFL season, when handicapping pro football games can become even riskier than it is earlier in the regular season. (If it were easy, why do you think Vegas sportsbooks accept larger wagers on NFL games than on any other team sport?) Because of differences in the motivation of the two combatants in a game, the "X-Factor" is often greater late in the season.

For example, one team might be a prime contender for a playoff spot or a favorable home-field edge in the closing weeks, while its opponent might be a noncontender that is just "playing out the string." The contender is motivated to win. The noncontender might be experimenting with younger players to assess how they might fit in its plans for the upcoming season. The situation gets even less predictable when two noncontenders meet, or when a contender that has its playoff position locked up might hold out some banged-up players if meeting a noncontender. Usually, the most "handicappable" games are those involving two very interested contenders, as you know going in that you'll get the best that each team has.

With the X-Factor high in so many games, handicappers often turn to the totals as prospective wagering vehicles instead of the team sides. But there's some conventional wisdom about betting totals in the closing weeks of the season that needs to be cleared up.

The conventional wisdom about late-season totals goes something like this. The weather in the East and Midwest is probably going to be cold and nasty, maybe even some snow. Neither team is going to be able to move the ball or score with any frequency. It's probably best to take the "under." And, even if the totals have already been reduced from the opening line by a full point or two, when it comes to game day, lots of bettors think, "When in doubt, better go under."

In fact, for the last seven seasons, the percentage of "overs" vs. the "unders" in the last three games of the regular season (50.3 percent) is virtually the same as the percentage for the entire regular season overall (50.2 percent). Conclusion? There is no easy money to be made by merely shading the "unders" in the last three weeks of the season.

Among other things, the oddsmakers are aware of this "under" tendency by late-season bettors. To start with, they reduce the size of their opening totals for the games in cold-weather cities. And, at the first forecast of any snowy or frigid weather, they reduce them further. It has not been uncommon for totals at many cold-weather sites to be down near 32, 31, or 30 by kickoff. Then, if the weather conditions turn out to be playable, the final score can end up being right near the regular scoring averages of the two opponents.

Always remember that the weather forecast is not the most important thing when it comes to totals. The key is the weather at the stadium, during the hours the game is being played. Often, a general weather forecast for the city area for the day isn't nearly enough. And, it's always important to remember that forecasts are predictions of what the weather might be. They are not statements of fact about what the weather will be.

When it comes to weather conditions themselves, cold weather is not usually a big prohibitor to scoring, in and of itself - unless it is extremely cold. Most NFL players have usually played in enough cool or normally cold weather in their careers to know how to adapt (gloves, waist pouches, heaters, and so on). A little snow is usually not a big prohibitor, just like a light rain is not a big prohibitor in the summer. In fact, the slippery field and slippery ball often lead to turnovers and easy touchdowns.

What is bad for scoring is heavy rain, heavy snow, extreme cold, or - the worst, in my opinion - high winds, or wind combined with any rainy, snowy, or cold conditions.

Wind - or wind-cold, wind-rain, or wind-snow - discourages the players, and makes them want the game to be over faster. Passes are harder to complete, so more running plays are called, "eating" the clock and reducing the risk of turnovers. Field goals are harder to convert, especially from any substantial distance. In fact, because field goals are more difficult, fewer end up even being attempted, and there are more punts in enemy territory in order to preserve valuable field position.

Chuck Sippl is the senior editor of The Gold Sheet, the "bible" for sports bettors since 1957. To get more angles, power ratings, and emerging-player information, subscribe to The Gold Sheet, or pick one up at your local newsstand. If you haven't seen The Gold Sheet and would like a complimentary copy, call The Gold Sheet at (800) 798-GOLD (4653) and just say you read about it in Card Player. You can look up The Gold Sheet on the web at www.goldsheet.com.

---

Sign in to your myCardPlayer account to post comments.

User Name:

Password:

Remember Me

 

Need a myCardPlayer account?

Sign Up

Lost User Name or Password?

Get Help

 

Post a comment

Messages that harass, abuse or threaten other members; have obscene or otherwise objectionable content; have spam, commercial or advertising content or links may be removed and may result in the loss of your MyCardPlayer ID (including e-mail). Please do not post any private information unless you want it to be available publicly. Never assume that you are completely anonymous and cannot be identified by your posts.

 

your comment