Some observations from my personal records....
Over / Under 2005
Week 1: 7 Overs, 9 Unders
Week 2: 3 Overs, 12 Unders, 1 Push
Total: 10 Overs, 21 Unders, 1 Push. 67.7% Under rate
Average PPG
Week 1: 38.4
Week 2: 35.3
Season to Date: 36.9
2004 Season Average PPG: 43.1
2003 Season Average PPG: 41.8
So based on all that, you'd probably come to the conclusion that we are "due" for the Overs to start rolling in (if you are one of those believers in the "due" theory...which I really am not). Well, maybe not. I went back through my records to see what the O/U rate was in weeks immediately following a week in which there were at least 10 or more games which went Under. I had to go back to 2000, past 7 different instances of "10+ Unders in a week", to find a week following an "unusually Under" week that was more than 50% Overs. (I know, that is probably confusing as hell to read, try this for a re-wording...) The last 7 times there has been an overwhelmingly Under week, the following week has also seen the majority of the games go Under.
Furthermore, while 2004 saw PPG average 43.1 for the season, the avg. PPG for the first 6 weeks of 2004 was just 40.2. In that time period Unders outnumbered Overs 50-37-1, and Unders outcovered Overs in every one of those weeks. Week 2 of last year, Unders outdid Overs 10-6...followed by Unders going 9-5 the following week.
2003 shows a similar trend. Unders outdo Overs 54-46 through 7 weeks. And there was an early "overly Under" week, Week 3, which went 10-4 to the Unders...followed by Unders going 9-5 in the following week.
It could just be a blip, but it does seem to me that a pattern has emerged where scores rise as the season wears on. This wasn't always the case, but it was true for '03 and '04.
I DO expect Avg PPG to rise this week, but that is mainly due to the four teams that are on their bye weeks: Baltimore and Washington (2 teams with very good defences and fairly inept offences), Houston and Detroit (2 teams that have had some difficulty scoring). That alone should raise average scores... but might not be enough to cause more Overs, as the posted totals for this week are also higher on average, due to the absence of these teams.
===============================
Favs / Dogs 2005
Week 1: Favs outcovered Dogs 9-7
Week 2: Favs and Dogs each covered 7 games, with one Push, and one Pick 'Em game.
No exciting trends to report here.
===============================
The Spread 2005
Thus far the spread has played a very minimal role in deciding the betting outcome. Only twice in the 32 games played thus far has a favorite won the game but not covered the spread (Wash vs Chi, Week 1; Indy vs Jax, Week 2). That's just 6.45% of the time the spread winner was not the game winner, a very low rate (that's twice in 31 games, as there was one Pick 'Em game, and I don't count Pick 'Em's in the stats, as the spread winner must be the game winner). This rate will rise. It is one of the most stable and consistent statistics in NFL betting, each and every year.
Percentage of Games in which the spread winner did not win the game outright :
2004: 16.0% (41 times out of 257 games)
2003: 16.4% (41/250)
2002: 19.0% (50/263)
2001: 16.0% (39/244)
2000: 16.0% (40/250)
(Pick 'Em games and Pushes not included in above numbers, which is why the # of games played each season varies)
In any event, look for the spread to come into play much more in the coming weeks. I don't believe there has been any season in the past 10 years in which this figure has dipped below 15%.
===============================
My winning percentage 2005
Week 1: 6-4, 60%
Week 2: 10-0, 100%
Overall: 16-4, 80%
And no, I didn't post my picks online, so you'll just have to believe me...or not believe me. What an absolute joke. I mean, I am ecstatic, and right now I am seeing things so well (or you might say "lucking out") that I could correctly predict within 5 the number of hairs on your head. But I know there is not a snowball's chance in hell this ends up above even 60%, so I am already bracing for the inevitable downturn. It is "due", afterall.
Over / Under 2005
Week 1: 7 Overs, 9 Unders
Week 2: 3 Overs, 12 Unders, 1 Push
Total: 10 Overs, 21 Unders, 1 Push. 67.7% Under rate
Average PPG
Week 1: 38.4
Week 2: 35.3
Season to Date: 36.9
2004 Season Average PPG: 43.1
2003 Season Average PPG: 41.8
So based on all that, you'd probably come to the conclusion that we are "due" for the Overs to start rolling in (if you are one of those believers in the "due" theory...which I really am not). Well, maybe not. I went back through my records to see what the O/U rate was in weeks immediately following a week in which there were at least 10 or more games which went Under. I had to go back to 2000, past 7 different instances of "10+ Unders in a week", to find a week following an "unusually Under" week that was more than 50% Overs. (I know, that is probably confusing as hell to read, try this for a re-wording...) The last 7 times there has been an overwhelmingly Under week, the following week has also seen the majority of the games go Under.
Furthermore, while 2004 saw PPG average 43.1 for the season, the avg. PPG for the first 6 weeks of 2004 was just 40.2. In that time period Unders outnumbered Overs 50-37-1, and Unders outcovered Overs in every one of those weeks. Week 2 of last year, Unders outdid Overs 10-6...followed by Unders going 9-5 the following week.
2003 shows a similar trend. Unders outdo Overs 54-46 through 7 weeks. And there was an early "overly Under" week, Week 3, which went 10-4 to the Unders...followed by Unders going 9-5 in the following week.
It could just be a blip, but it does seem to me that a pattern has emerged where scores rise as the season wears on. This wasn't always the case, but it was true for '03 and '04.
I DO expect Avg PPG to rise this week, but that is mainly due to the four teams that are on their bye weeks: Baltimore and Washington (2 teams with very good defences and fairly inept offences), Houston and Detroit (2 teams that have had some difficulty scoring). That alone should raise average scores... but might not be enough to cause more Overs, as the posted totals for this week are also higher on average, due to the absence of these teams.
===============================
Favs / Dogs 2005
Week 1: Favs outcovered Dogs 9-7
Week 2: Favs and Dogs each covered 7 games, with one Push, and one Pick 'Em game.
No exciting trends to report here.
===============================
The Spread 2005
Thus far the spread has played a very minimal role in deciding the betting outcome. Only twice in the 32 games played thus far has a favorite won the game but not covered the spread (Wash vs Chi, Week 1; Indy vs Jax, Week 2). That's just 6.45% of the time the spread winner was not the game winner, a very low rate (that's twice in 31 games, as there was one Pick 'Em game, and I don't count Pick 'Em's in the stats, as the spread winner must be the game winner). This rate will rise. It is one of the most stable and consistent statistics in NFL betting, each and every year.
Percentage of Games in which the spread winner did not win the game outright :
2004: 16.0% (41 times out of 257 games)
2003: 16.4% (41/250)
2002: 19.0% (50/263)
2001: 16.0% (39/244)
2000: 16.0% (40/250)
(Pick 'Em games and Pushes not included in above numbers, which is why the # of games played each season varies)
In any event, look for the spread to come into play much more in the coming weeks. I don't believe there has been any season in the past 10 years in which this figure has dipped below 15%.
===============================
My winning percentage 2005
Week 1: 6-4, 60%
Week 2: 10-0, 100%
Overall: 16-4, 80%
And no, I didn't post my picks online, so you'll just have to believe me...or not believe me. What an absolute joke. I mean, I am ecstatic, and right now I am seeing things so well (or you might say "lucking out") that I could correctly predict within 5 the number of hairs on your head. But I know there is not a snowball's chance in hell this ends up above even 60%, so I am already bracing for the inevitable downturn. It is "due", afterall.
Last edited:
