First things first: Brian Cushing will apparently kick Rey Maualuga’s butt. We’re still waiting to see whether he will top off this ass kicking with a guttural war cry defending the honor of Erin Andrews.

Now, Brian, Add About 15 Pounds & Get Pressin'

Rey Maualuga, lest you forgot, gained a couple of infamy units back in January when he got jiggy wid ESPN sideline princess Erin Andrews on his way to the locker (unbeknownst to her at the time). America swiftly admonished Maualuga, who later apologized as though he had inadvertantly triggered a third-world genocide.

But the backlash continues.

Posted as a prop bet in the 225 lbs. bench press at this year’s NFL Combine, Maualuga¹ will compare reps with Brian Cushing. Odds for this event opened with Cushing at +170 and Maualuga at -220.

Somebody must have some serious hopes for Cushing’s ability to press since his number has now moved to +140. (Maualuga’s has dropped to -180.)

And We Will Give Thee Every One of Us 1100 Shekels of Silver

The only other lines moves are some generic ones for QB 40 times and vertical jumps. (Not surprisingly the line moves indicate that the betting public favors a QB to run a 40 time faster than 4.53s and jump a vertical higher than 32½ inches. Good luck with that one, Public!)

We’re not recommending any action here. The vig is horrible and the book is play at your own risk. (Sportsbook.com in this case.)² And we have no idea if this line move was motivated by smart money, Erin Andrews,³ someone in the USC locker room, or that Maualuga is cited at 37 bench reps for a personal best while Cushing is listed at 35.⁴ With a difference of only two, maybe someone thought Cushing was a value at +170.

The Combine begins today. Media whoring begins in earnest tomorrow. Cushing and Maualuga will be evaluated on Saturday.

·

·

6.34 Seconds of Panic

Ever since the NFL Network thought it good TV to air Rich Eisen running a 6.34-second 40 time in a pair of wingtips, well, it was only a matter of time before some sports book would start making offers on the combine.

Sportsbook.com is now posting odds on the upcoming NFL Scouting Combine, this Wednesday (18 February) in Indianapolis.

The props are on quantifiable events: the 40-yard dash, number of bench presses and height of vertical jump.  (What?!? No odds on the Cybex test?)

Think some juiced-out wannabe pro linebacker can bench 225 lbs. more than 39½ times?  Believe some prospective wide-out can break a 40 time of 4.32? If you’re willing to pay for a 15¢ line, then it’s all yours to bet. (That is, if you have a balance with Sportsbook.com — which we don’t, and can’t condone.)

These odds do seem fair — meaning there are no glaringly absurd lines, like over-under the number of times Deion will ask a prospect “how he feels”¹ — so there’s a decent chance these might get carried by other books. (The only real mismatch is the fastest 40 time between Missouri’s 5′ 10″, 234 lbs. QB Chase Daniel  [+350] vs. West Virginia’s 6′ 1″, 192 lbs. QB Pat White [-600]. Otherwise they’re evenly paired.)

Both Offensive Linemen are Expected to Complete the 40-yard Dash

The most intriguing wager on this card (and easily the most exciting foot race since the Krispy Kreme Challenge) is the fastest 40 between Alabama’s 6′ 4″ 330 lbs. Andre Smith and Oklahoma’s 6′ 5″ 335 lbs. Duke Robinson.²  Come on gentlemen, there’s light refreshments and an O₂ tank being served at the finish line!

Photo credit: NFL Draft Dog

[NFL Combine Odds Go Live — Covers]

·

·

After spending days poring over 100+ stories on Super Bowl prop bets, we hoped to come to some definitive conclusion on the subject which would justify a thousand-word, posthumous (stale) write-up.

Nope. No such luck.

So instead, here are two thoughts to keep in storage until the SB XLIV hype machine revs its engine in early 2010.

One: Prop bets are generally priced for suckers. The money-line gaps are 40¢, 60¢, 75¢ or more. (Witness the TV ratings prop: Which market yields greater ratings Arizona +300 or Pennsylvania -500. Is that $2 of vig?)

But around Groundhog’s Day, demand for money-backed NFL prognostications runs high, and supply dwindles quickly.  It’s a sellers’ market, and buyers who want to bet the over-under on the number of Anheuser-Busch beer commercials can’t afford to be choosy.

Maybe it’s a good lesson in accepting when it’s inevitable that you will force action, and to be prepared to minimize it. (Personally, we hit on one prop, and we proceeded to go out and squander it on another. And we’d be quick to take credit for calling the under on that wacky 1st-to-score-jersey-number prop at 38½. But we can’t claim to have spotted a guy demoted to the practice squad back in week 3 as likely first to break the plane. Frankly, not even Mrs. Russell had money on that one.)

Sidebar: Somebody knew something about someone. Early in the week, Gary Russell was listed at Pinnacle as +1916 to score the game’s first TD. By Saturday, Russell’s number had dropped to +1384. That’s more than all other players (moving down) combined. If this kind of move is indicative of the amount of money being wagered on a player, then Russell took in more money (or “sharper” money) then the all of the other listed players (20).  At some books, Russell wasn’t even listed individually.

Two: Tried to find where most of the crazy prop lines originate. Near as we can figure, the “normal” lines comes from the LVSC. Normal in this case refers to the common statistical breakdown bets:  Odds to score a TD; whether Tim Halfback gains more than 33.5 yards rushing from scrimmage; first quarter sides (ARZ +½), and so on…

Then there’s the more “exotic” lines: Madden’s food fetish, Michaels’ gambling innuendos, fade Matt Millen’s pick, TV ratings, commercials, cheerleaders, Jay Leno, thanking God —

Wait a minute:

Which team’s cheerleaders will be shown more often on camera?

Steelers: -175

Cardinals: +135

Who in hell issued these odds? (BoDog gets the initial credit for this one by our estimate.) Whoever set that cheerleader line should be fired because a) they set the cheerleaderless team¹ as 60% favorites, and b) they made it a 20¢ line — that’s like the cheapest on the board!

As the first week of Bowl Hype began, gimmick props were in short supply. Degenerates tapped their feet waiting for something other than the over-under for field goals, or whether the shortest touchdown would be longer than 1½ yards.

By Friday of that week, the BoDog press release began making the rounds. Blogs jumped on wholeheartedly. But the odds weren’t posted on BoDog that Friday. Or Saturday. Or Sunday. Or — well, we’re not actually sure when BoDog actually went live with these numbers, but we did see them by about the middle of the following week at certain questionable offshores.

Speaking of questionable offshores, this is a trend we’ve seen before. Books publicize odds well in advance of posting. In effect, their opening lines get vetted by the public before mistakes like the one above get offered to anyone sharper than a butter knife. And if a few blogs can quickly point out the gaping holes in your card, well imagine what the attention of Esquire can do.  BetUS bent the ear of Esquire to tout props that bordered on downright embarrassing. (Santonio Holmes was a +1500 to be MVP, but only +200 to be arrested leading up to or after the Super Bowl.)

Springsteen’s set list prognostication was laid to rest as early as Thursday when some paper mag called Rolling Stone advertised a line being offered by Sportsbook.com. That caused thousands to apparently sign up to the on-line sports book and begin pounding the crap out of one specific list.²

And finally, did anybody really cash on the Brenda Warner 3½ appearances during the game coverage? Really? You took the over?

·

·

The following post may contain material that is not suitable for all readers.

Both ordinal and nominal data will be shown in various stages of undress and in suggestive positions.

After the jump, we drink enough to make a wager on the Super Bowl 1st to score a touchdown prop.

Read the rest of this entry »

Quick: Which of the two Super Bowl teams is more likely to forgo a high-percentage chip-shot field goal, choosing instead to go for it on 4th and short?

Why, the chippy and smash-mouth Arizona Cardinals, of course…

(We’re kinda freaked out by the answer too.)

We were trying to convince ourselves that betting No (-185) on the prop “Will both teams score a field goal of 33+ yards” was a good deal. Already hampered by small sample sizes (2008 only), it’s a better idea to look at when (and why) the teams opted not to kick.

After the jump: Find out how the Steelers stunk it up on 4th down in 2008. Learn which kind of knife Todd Haley most enjoys driving into people’s hearts. And discover whether or not we talk ourselves into dropping a whole unit on this stupid prop once we discover Pinnacle’s offering it for -179.  (Hint: Oh yeah!)

Read the rest of this entry »