Views
404
Comments
23
  • November 09, 2009 08:01 AM ET

In college football, is covering "The Spread" relevant?

G. Opack (4-19-1) vs PSUinToolbox (1-0-0)
1
Votes
19
Votes
1
Votes
19
Votes


As I have said in my previous sermons, covering the spread is the most accurate and unbiased way to determine the best college football teams.
Every week sports fans vote with their hard earned money trumping what the votes of coaches and sportswrites. Since betting has become quasi-legal, each sportsfan can vote by betting on his or her favorite team. The team that CONSISTANTLY exceeds expectations will have the best record against the spread.
Big bucks programs may not do as much with their talent as small budget programs and are thus penalized fro squandering talent.


You've peaked my interest enough into entering the Throwdown fray. But I have a tough time figuring out your premise.

The spread is not used to determine the best teams. The spread is used to determine the favorite in a given matchup, at a specific point in the season, at a specific location.

A spread does not have anything to do with the play on the field. It is an attempt by oddsmakers to level the betting dollars on both sides of the line. The spread is very good at what it is designed to do.

A spread does not provide:
* a probability of Team A beating Team B.
* the variability (distribution) between teams. Texas is more predictable than Florida State, for example.
* the combined effect of home-neutral-away comparison
* a rank-order of all teams.
* impartiality if used for rankings. Imagine the conspiracies if Vegas determined BCS participants.

A better method to determine the best college football team would be to provide a point spread plus variance for bettors. Then provide a rank order that participates as a BCS computer poll.

No idea what you meant with the squandering talent comment.


College football has one major built-in inequity and that is $$$. The difference in funding among DivI teams is so great that most schools have no realistic chance of winning the CF Nat. Champ. So typically, the teams with the biggest budgets will win over teams with smaller budgets. Texas, Fla, SCal etc. The underfunded teams like Akron, Cent Mich have no chance and never will.
If every school is supposed to start the season with a chance of playing for the N.C. then leveling the playing field is important. If you are happy that big $ schools dominate, than the status quo is fine.
With that being said, one way to even the playing field is to factor in the point spread when determining which team is the "best". Las Vegas has a point spread system in place because they acknowledge that some schools have no chance against other schools, so they offer incentives as a way to generate wagering.
Beating the spread would reward overachievers and punish underachievers, regardless of who they are.
As of this morning, UConn was 9-1 v the spread with Tex, Ala and Fla around .500 meaning UConn is overach. & the rest underacheiving. Certainly, UC has the least $ to work with


Couple of flaws here.

Every school starts the season with a chance to fund their athletic budgets for their school. A handful realize they need to compete for the NC to do so. New Mexico State knows it has no shot at an NC and frankly doesn't care. With Big Conferences, Big Schools, Big Cities, Big Budgets, that playing field is impossible to level.

Reward and Punish
Vegas point spreads only work because of the independence (impartiality) existing between on-field performance and off-field betting. Rewarding or punishing based upon performance to the spread destroys this crucial independence.

Circular logic

Let's say Mack Brown knows he has to beat 42 points to gain a Spread win. He tacks on late TDs to win by 45. Vegas and betters realize Texas is favorable ATS. The line goes up. Mack Brown now has to reach 50 in the next game. He fails to reach it in game 2 and Vegas reacts by predicting the next win by 35. Vegas wants every team to finish .500 ATS. Your method means the line and the performance are now interdependent...

...which destroys all of the assumptions that allow Vegas to create the line in the first place.


I would argue that my concept would change the football landscape in a positive way. It would guarentee that small budget teams that are motivated can compete with financial juggernauts.
In your argument you say "every school has a chance to fund their athletic budgets" but what you leave out is that not every school has the same resources to fund their athletic budget. The resources are a function of many issues, such as size of school, wealth of alums, state funding etc. In your statement that many schools "do not care" is not a fact but your opinion. Actually, the schools that do not care are Div II, Harv. AppSt, Mont St etc. I would have to believe that all the schools with Div I teams do care.
I think that your statement "...playing field is impossible to level" is the point of the argument. The one item that does level the field is the spread. Texas may stop playing cupcake schools because of the large point spread they would be burdened with.
You are absolutely correct that Vegas wants every team to finish .500 ATS, but the team making the most with what they have will surpass that average in spite of playing wealthier teams. Case in point UConn.


Vegas works becuase it currently is (theoretically, ahem.. legally) independent from coaches and players. When coaches and players start making decisions based upon point spreads, and are rewarded for such, that make it dangerously tempting to point shaving and fixing.

I like the independant nature of Vegas. I think the point spreads do work and can be used for team ranking, if you use the following system:

1. Vegas now calculates opening spreads using computers and experts. Each point spread calculation is for 1 opponent out of 120 at one location out of 2 (home/away.. ignore neutral field for now). So 1 point difference out of 240 for each team per week.

I propose to let Vegas computers calculate the point spread for all possible matchups each week.

2. Combine all of those point spread using computers, and rank the teams much like the BCS computers do now with actual scores. The Vegas computers would use all possible matchups including that week's results.

3. Vegas then produces a weekly poll that is used by the BCS formula.

You get the expertise of Vegas, without impacting the coaching/players directly.

Thanks for the TD!

Comments (23) Add A Comment

November 9, 2009  10:13 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Yes it is relevant....if your betting!

November 9, 2009  10:15 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

"No idea what you meant with the squandering talent comment"

I think they mean when teams bench their starters during a blowout and don't cover.

November 9, 2009  11:05 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Be careful PSU, you're coming off a little too smart. Most TDers are going to be scrambling to dictionary.com to find out what a variance is.

Oh, and easy vote to the right--->

November 9, 2009  11:09 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE
QUOTE(#3):
Originally posted 11:05 AM ET  11.09 by Illinois Cheesehead

Be careful PSU, you're coming off a little too smart. Most TDers are going to be scrambling to dictionary.com to find out what a variance is.Oh, and easy vote to the right--->

lol. Should I provide links?

November 9, 2009  11:15 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

No, it's funny to watch them try to figure it out.

November 9, 2009  11:21 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

tHogg voted

November 9, 2009  11:37 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

"A spread does not have anything to do with the play on the field. It is an attempt by oddsmakers to level the betting dollars on both sides of the line. The spread is very good at what it is designed to do."

Exactly - The spread has little to do with predicting the final score. It's what the house uses to minimize it's risk.

November 9, 2009  11:38 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

I didnt vote

November 9, 2009  02:06 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE
QUOTE(#7):
Originally posted 11:37 AM ET  11.09 by MountainGator

A spread does not have anything to do with the play on the field. It is an attempt by oddsmakers to level the betting dollars on both sides of the line.

I agree. The spread is all about equalizing bets. Vegas has no interest in deciding the superior teams, just in getting the money to flow....

...actually, that same sentence applies to the BCS.

UB votes parallel (in a Euclidian sense) to this vector ------------------->

November 9, 2009  02:11 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Props to G Opack for the avatar. Boobs & beer are always in fashion on FN.

November 9, 2009  02:15 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE
QUOTE(#3):
Originally posted 11:05 AM ET  11.09 by Illinois Cheesehead

Be careful PSU, you're coming off a little too smart.

and you are coming off like a pretentious prick.

November 9, 2009  02:50 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

I like Vegas because of their impartiality. They don't care who wins or losses as long as they don't take a bath financially. So when a big school plays a small school, they even the field for self serving reasons. But more importantly they are realistic about expectations. Big schools get the 5* athletes while small schools get the 2* athletes. By the end of the game the better athletes make better plays and win. No brainer, but what if the little guys were playing far greater than expectations and lost by three points instead of thirty. It would still be a loss. A small group of overachevers playing a tough schedule could cover the spread ninety percent of the time and still lose most of their games.
Seems unfair to me.
A school with ten thousand students v a school with forty thousand students...do the math.
All I am saying that no matter what system is in place the monied schools will always prevail.

November 9, 2009  02:56 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE
QUOTE(#7):
Originally posted 11:37 AM ET  11.09 by MountainGator

"A spread does not have anything to do with the play on the field.

You are correct that the spread doesn't effect the play but it does indicate what the expectations of the fans (bettors) are. Going one step farther, fans expect some teams to consistantly win ten games, Texas, etc. But what goes into those expectations has to do with the amount of money the school spends on coaches, facilities etc and the universities return on investment. Make no mistake, it is about money. Also, many alumni and fans are betting huge amounts of money with the expectation that their team will win AND cover the spread.

November 9, 2009  02:59 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Your "the spread is god" theory has many holes, not least of which is that lines are heavily influenced by bets. Vegas doesn't care about leveling the playing field, they care about leveling the risk. Two different things.

November 9, 2009  03:02 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

I think I am arguing a difficult concept because it is easy to follow the money and the hype. Big bands, big crowds etc but those are money machines that don't reflect the financial investments made by the universities.
I am arguing for redefining how we gauge success. And judging from the beat down I am getting, I need psychiatric help.

November 9, 2009  03:06 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

I hear what you're saying, but what's the point? Do you want to see Vegas lines computed into the BCS in some ridiculous algorithm?

November 9, 2009  03:23 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE
QUOTE(#15):
Originally posted 03:02 PM ET  11.09 by G. Opack

I think I am arguing a difficult concept because it is easy to follow the money and the hype. Big bands, big crowds etc but those are money machines that don't reflect the financial investments made by the universities. I am arguing for redefining how we gauge success. And judging from the beat down I am getting, I need psychiatric help.

I can suggest Dr. Swamp's office on the NCAAF Message Boards. Brilliant Doctor and highly recommended. :)

November 9, 2009  03:37 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

"You've peaked my interest enough into entering the Throwdown fray."

That's "piqued."

November 9, 2009  03:42 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Wow I don't know why but when I opened this TD I thought it was referring to "The Spread" Offense. I was a bit confused because I think it would be quite imperative to play defense against a spread offense especially if you wanted to cover "the spread".

 
November 9, 2009  03:44 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE
QUOTE(#18):
Originally posted 03:37 PM ET  11.09 by Cattus Culinarius

"You've peaked my interest enough into entering the Throwdown fray."That's "piqued."

That would be true if you had not realized how little interest I show in everything else.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Leaderboard

  Fan W L T Win %
1 YODA 51 3 2 92.9%
2 Hyped78 189 19 4 90.1%
3 FoosBall 118 12 3 89.8%
4 [The] Coach 130 21 7 84.5%
5 Argos: Lets Go Packers! 46 7 4 84.2%
6 Southern Discomfort 42 7 3 83.7%
7 BBK - Now it's all football 51 9 6 81.8%
8 BSchwar... 128 27 6 81.4%
9 BobbyOr... 43 10 3 79.5%
10 rstowe 315 79 20 78.5%

The Si.com Cover Hub Go to the Cover Hub

Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Bills owner wanted Gruden
    Views
    50580
    Comments
    381
  2. 2
    Raiders players happy with new QB
    Views
    9520
    Comments
    85
  3. 3
    Why Knicks passed on Iverson
    Views
    21677
    Comments
    84
  4. 4
    Yankees keeping eye on Halladay
    Views
    42176
    Comments
    81
  5. 5
    Seahawks interested in Holmgren?
    Views
    8660
    Comments
    54

Message Boards

  1. NCAAF > General NCAAF

    Are college football coaches…
    Views
    363
    Replies
    52

  2. NCAAF > General NCAAF

    CFB Game Day 11/21/2009
    Views
    276
    Replies
    141

  3. NCAAF > General NCAAF

    2009's most disappointing team
    Views
    275
    Replies
    20

Blogs