Huskers Open As 3 Point Favorites On The Road vs MN; Up To 4.5

[Huskerthom]

The line on this game confuses me.

First, for the first time in several years, Nebraska has actually done well ATS this season.

Typically, Vegas will adjust for trends like that. I tend to think Vegas could have set the line at NU -6.5 to -7.5 range, and they would have gotten closer to equal money on both sides (which is their goal). But instead, they opened at -3 and it's about -4 on average currently (meaning, the early money has come in on Nebraska).

Just the eyeball test tells me Nebraska should win by 10+. So why is the spread so low? I'm sure some of that is based on recent history between the two teams. And that we are 0-3 on the road this season. But still, there's little doubt Nebraska is an improved team -- and I think there's doubt Minnesota can say the same.

Anyhow, whenever I see a line that seems misguided, I think Vegas knows what they are doing. There's a psychological red flag to this line. I find it worrisome because it defies what I consider logical reason.

I haven't bet in many years. And even if I did, I wouldn't bet on Nebraska games. But it seems so clear to me Nebraska should cover -3.5 to -4. So if I was forced to bet, that's the way I would go. But due to the red flag this line is sending me, I'd actually completely avoid it.

I think there is a concern in Vegas that DONU will eventually have a let down. This seems like a ga.e tailor .ade for that.

 

[Cornjob]

The line on this game confuses me.

First, for the first time in several years, Nebraska has actually done well ATS this season.

Typically, Vegas will adjust for trends like that. I tend to think Vegas could have set the line at NU -6.5 to -7.5 range, and they would have gotten closer to equal money on both sides (which is their goal). But instead, they opened at -3 and it's about -4 on average currently (meaning, the early money has come in on Nebraska).

Just the eyeball test tells me Nebraska should win by 10+. So why is the spread so low? I'm sure some of that is based on recent history between the two teams. And that we are 0-3 on the road this season. But still, there's little doubt Nebraska is an improved team -- and I think there's doubt Minnesota can say the same.

Anyhow, whenever I see a line that seems misguided, I think Vegas knows what they are doing. There's a psychological red flag to this line. I find it worrisome because it defies what I consider logical reason.

I haven't bet in many years. And even if I did, I wouldn't bet on Nebraska games. But it seems so clear to me Nebraska should cover -3.5 to -4. So if I was forced to bet, that's the way I would go. But due to the red flag this line is sending me, I'd actually completely avoid it.

Is there a way to test your assumption about the number of bets for Nebraska? Obviously it was on the side of Nebraska early to move the spread, but it hasn't moved more than 1-2 points. My point is that I think maybe the national awareness that Nebraska looks a lot better this year is lagging behind, still stuck with the narrative of the team that can't win, keeps disappointing, etc. Maybe betting patterns still reflect that impression more than we as Husker fans realize.

Posting on national boards, there is a LOT of sentiment from people that enjoy seeing the Huskers down. People tend to make the mistake of betting with their sentiment more than logic, and maybe that's what this is.

 

[Red Reign]

Up to 5 one one site

 

[HuskerWeatherman]

Is there a way to test your assumption about the number of bets for Nebraska? Obviously it was on the side of Nebraska early to move the spread, but it hasn't moved more than 1-2 points. My point is that I think maybe the national awareness that Nebraska looks a lot better this year is lagging behind, still stuck with the narrative of the team that can't win, keeps disappointing, etc. Maybe betting patterns still reflect that impression more than we as Husker fans realize.

Posting on national boards, there is a LOT of sentiment from people that enjoy seeing the Huskers down. People tend to make the mistake of betting with their sentiment more than logic, and maybe that's what this is.

You'd ideally be able to separate the big money bets from the amateur bets.

You are correct that trends tend to have a lag. Though I'm referring to the oddsmakers rather than the bettors.

My point being ... I've watched the betting lines in recent weeks move in Nebraska's favor early in the week, which the books do when the money is coming in on the Nebraska side to encourage more action on the other side. Eventually, they adjust it enough to balance the money.

BTW -- 1-2 point movements are significant.

So we saw the same thing happen this week as with recent weeks. The early money came in on Nebraska and the books had to adjust the line accordingly. It's more ideal for the oddsmakers if the opening line moves little to nothing. Vegas will almost never lose in that case. They don't want to have to chase the betting side. Based on what's happened this week, they once again had to adjust significantly due to most of the money coming in on Nebraska. So that tells me the oddsmakers haven't adjusted well to the trend. They are now hoping as they've adjusted the spread higher, the late money will come in on Minnesota. Or -- they know something the betting public doesn't -- which hasn't been the case this season, as the Nebraska side of the ATS has been right more times than not.

I'm basically saying, I'm surprised the line didn't open more in Nebraska's favor than it did -- as it seemed obvious at -3 to -3.5 to start the early money was going to come in on Nebraska. It shouldn't be that obvious -- unless there's a red flag.

 

[HuskerWeatherman]

I think there is a concern in Vegas that DONU will eventually have a let down. This seems like a ga.e tailor .ade for that.

Vegas tends not to operate on hunches.