Betting lines are just handicapping measures. They are often not on point.
For example, the Vegas line projected Indy to be a 10 pt winner over Bucs and they pounded their pootie by 3+ TDs.
Detroit was only supposed to be one point better and at the 58 minute mark they had the Bucs scrunched by a couple TDs, allowing room for a Prevent defense to give em a consolation score late.
Seattle was only rated a six point fave over the Bucs and squashed em by two TDs.
It appears that reports of the Bucs imminent demise have been greatly exagerated. After week 9 Tampa Bay has advanced another half game over it’s two closest divisional competitors while off for the week by virtue of both of them being defeated today in upsets. The Saints loss especially was a shocker which I predicted BTW based on their history of giving winless teams a break at their own expense.
Quite simply, this team now blows as bad or more than last season’s model.
I was right there with many locals over the past three weeks - enjoying the three consecutive wins, albeit against incredibly marginal opponents. As the Saints and Falcons started off weakly, there was a glimmer of “Hey we could win the Division!”
Its really amazing what happens in a month.
Most Gamblers are Fools, Deep Down.
This is the NFL and on any given Sunday any team can win.
But I must say it is wonderful watching you predict the Bucs future.
The Psychic Hot line may be your next true calling.
Teams change year to year, drastically, I might add. That’s the reason our division has alternated a champ from year to year. It’s why the San Diego Chargers are having the start they are, it’s why the Jet’s are having theirs. It’s why N.O. has flipped its stats and why the Bears have theirs. It’s the nature of the business. It’s become apparent that you get your opinions of teams strictly from betting lines. What’d the line say about that Carolina game a few weeks back? Or Michigan’s against Appalachian State? Gators, Ohio State? For a non Buccaneer fan, you sure patrol this forum a lot.
Actually, jvnootz, teams DON’T change all that much from year to year. What DOES change from year to year is strength of schedule. Look at the Bucs since the Super Bowl year ... In 2002, they finished 12-4 and won the Super Bowl, so got a 1st place schedule for the following season, and sure enough, finished 2003 at 7-9. For 2004, they had a 3rd place schedule, and fell to 5-11. This got them a 4th place schedule for 2005, and they responded with a 11-5 season, winning them a tougher 1st place schedule for 2006, when they went 4-12. Due to their last place schedule, this year they have a legit shot at making 11-5 again. Now, you tell me, have the bucs been very good to mediocre, to bad, to good, to bad, and back to good in succesive seasons? Aren’t most of the players and coaches the same from one year to the next?
Teams change year to year, drastically, I might add. That’s the reason our division has alternated a champ from year to year. It’s why the San Diego Chargers are having the start they are, it’s why the Jet’s are having theirs. It’s why N.O. has flipped its stats and why the Bears have theirs. It’s the nature of the business. It’s become apparent that you get your opinions of teams strictly from betting lines. What’d the line say about that Carolina game a few weeks back? Or Michigan’s against Appalachian State? Gators, Ohio State? For a non Buccaneer fan, you sure patrol this forum a lot.
Actually, jvnootz, teams DON’T change all that much from year to year. What DOES change from year to year is strength of schedule. Look at the Bucs since the Super Bowl year ... In 2002, they finished 12-4 and won the Super Bowl, so got a 1st place schedule for the following season, and sure enough, finished 2003 at 7-9. For 2004, they had a 3rd place schedule, and fell to 5-11. This got them a 4th place schedule for 2005, and they responded with a 11-5 season, winning them a tougher 1st place schedule for 2006, when they went 4-12. Due to their last place schedule, this year they have a legit shot at making 11-5 again. Now, you tell me, have the bucs been very good to mediocre, to bad, to good, to bad, and back to good in succesive seasons? Aren’t most of the players and coaches the same from one year to the next?
Not whole teams change that much. Your SOS angle doesn’t really work when you go from 0-6 to 5-0 vs the very same teams.
I think that is the big take away here - the difference in the NFC South is startling this year - and not in a good way. The injuries have crippled the teams and the Bucs surprising depth has saved them.
Carolina - does not have a QB, plain and simple. Starting the oldest QB to ever win a game (Vinny Testaverde) is not an answer
Atlanta - Michael Vick is gone and that hurt badly - and that is not McKay’s fault. Losing Schaub as a well qualified backup was a mistake as an afterthought, but you cannot forcast the future. In addition, Perterno as head coach has been an unmistakable disaster - something Blank is responsible for since he heavily influenced the coaching decision this time. In contrast, Blank has announced for the next coach McKay will be making the choice. If this blows up in McKay’s face, then he could be finished as GM in Atlanta. This year, they are well done with no QB.
New Orleans - also have had a number of injuries, but the awful defense has done this team in.
The Bucs up tick this year has to do with (A) they are better with a bunch of rookies playing, especially on offensive line (I think this may be the team’s best offensive line we have ever seen since 1976 - it is the youngest line in the NFL in 2007), (B) the “cupcake” schedule the NFC South gave them for a change this year, and (C) the fourth place schedule. I do think if the Bucs had to play Carolina’s schedule (Green Bay, Dallas, Seattle) the Bucs may have been in trouble. Considering the team lost to Seattle, the weakest of those three teams, it does not look good.
My hope is the team wins in the first roiund of the playoffs - which is a lot of progress for a 4-12 team the previous year - to show the fans they can beat a team with a winning record, before facing the elite two teams in the NFC this year (Green Bay and Dallas). The best result would be to show some progress in the team’s development this season.
Not whole teams change that much. Your SOS angle doesn’t really work when you go from 0-6 to 5-0 vs the very same teams.
I don’t know what “SOS angle” means ... but as Acura T points out in his reply to my comments, the main reeason the Bucs record improved against division foes this season is that the rest of the division collapsed from injuries and coach/QB fiascos. They still haven’t beaten anybody with a winning record this year, that can’t be argued.
I’ll admit, they are better this year than last, but not that they are a ‘good’ team this year. They are a mid-level team playiing a terribly weak schedule, in a weak division racked by injuries and off-field controversy, which they have avoided. This has resulted in a division title, a surprising record, possibly 11-5 for the season, and a possible 1st round playoff win. The team is better this season than last year’s terrible 5-11 bunch, but they’re not good enough for 11-5 without the weak schedule and crippled division.
XenaGuy, I think we see eye to eye for the most part. I don’t know what your definition of good is however. A good team by my definition is one that wins the games it is supposed to. By that defination, the Bucs are a good team. A great or excellent team is one that wins almost no matter what. The Bucs are not that team - the Patroits, Colts, perhaps Cowboys, and Green Bay are that level.
I guess to make my level of “good” is lower than yours. That is our difference, slight as it is.
