Doc's Sports Blog

NFL Betting Stats Breakdown - Week 6

By Robert Ferringo

Pretty straightforward week in the NFL. Large chalk went 1-3 ATS as a boat load of teams that shouldn't have been large favorites - Washington, Minnesota - were shackled with big numbers. On top of that, home dogs finally started barking, winning three of four to pull their overall mark (10-14-2) back to respectability. But the true money play this weekend was the 'under', as the oddsmakers finally overpriced most of the totals to stem the tide of the nearly 60 percent run the 'over' had been on. Of course, the un-friggin'-real irony is that my top play of the week was a great 'under' in the Dallas game, which got pissed away in ridiculous fashion over the last 2:10. So of 14 games there were four 'over' games, and I had one of them on the biggest hook. Once again: I am a great handicapper with terrible luck. Ugh. But I'm not bitter.

2008 TOTALS
Favorites: 45-39-3
Home teams: 42-43-3
Home underdogs: 10-14-2
AFC vs. NFC: 9-10
Large Chalk (-7.5 or more): 8-12
‘Over’: 47-41

WEEK 6
Favorites: 6-8
Home teams: 8-6
Home underdogs: 3-1
AFC vs. NFC: 1-1
Large Chalk (-7.5 or more): 1-3
‘Over’: 4-10

WEEK 5
Favorites: 6-7-1
Home teams: 4-9-1
Home underdogs: 1-3-1
AFC vs. NFC: 2-3
Large Chalk (-7.5 or more): 1-1
‘Over’: 8-6

WEEK 4
Favorites: 7-6
Home teams: 7-6
Home underdogs: 2-2
AFC vs. NFC: 3-0
Large Chalk (-7.5 or more): 2-2
‘Over’: 10-3

WEEK 3
Favorites: 10-6
Home teams: 9-7
Home underdogs: 0-1
AFC vs. NFC: 1-3
Large Chalk (-7.5 or more): 2-3
‘Over’: 11-5

WEEK 2
Favorites: 6-7-2
Home teams: 5-8-2
Home underdogs: 1-3-1
AFC vs. NFC: 1-0
Large Chalk (-7.5 or more): 1-0
‘Over’: 7-8

WEEK 1
Favorites: 10-6
Home teams: 9-7
Home underdogs: 3-4
AFC vs. NFC: 1-3
Large Chalk (-7.5 or more): 1-3
‘Over’: 7-9

Man, Washington State Sucks

By Robert Ferringo

Good news Syracuse fans, you may not have the worst BCS team in the country. That would be Washington State.

Fresh off a 66-13 beat down in Corvallis - that actually wasn't even that close - the Cougars just found out that their third-string quarterback, who had been starting because of injuries, tore both his ACL and MCL in his left knee and (mercifully) is done for the year.

Now for the really good news: this week the Cougars host USC. And their starter will be either A) freshman Dan Wagner, who is just five month's removed from his prom, B) Kevin Lopina, who, according to the AP has "sufficiently recovered from a broken bone in his back" (ouch), or C) Peter Roberts, the kid who won the open tryout that Wazzou had last week to be the third-string QB.

The spread on this game is currently USC (-43). Let me be the first to say that likely won't be enough. 

(Photo courtesy of The Big Lead)

UNC's Tate Done For The Year

A potentially conference-changing injury hit North Carolina this week, as stud wideout Brandon Tate blew out his knee and is done for the year. Can't overstate the impact this info is going to have on the UNC offense. Not only was Tate a game-changer with his big plays, but the threat of Tate was enough to change the way that defenses schemed against them.

From ESPN:

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. -- North Carolina receiver Brandon Tate is out for the season because of a knee injury, ending his college career and leaving the No. 18 Tar Heels without a big-play threat and kick returner.

Coach Butch Davis said Monday that an MRI on Sunday night confirmed an earlier diagnosis of torn anterior cruciate and medial collateral ligaments.

Tate injured his right knee while returning a punt in the first quarter of the 29-24 win against Notre Dame on Saturday. He walked off the field and into the locker room under his own power, and did not return, and the injury initially was announced as a sprain.

Tate scored five touchdowns this season and was leading the Atlantic Coast Conference with 163.7 all-purpose yards per game. He had 376 yards receiving, 143 yards rushing, 305 kickoff return yards and 158 punt return yards.

"If [he's] not the most explosive player in college football, he's really close," quarterback Cameron Sexton said. "To replace a kick returner, punt returner and receiver of his caliber, you just can't do it. But we're going to find somebody who's going to play really well in his place."

Debunking Three NFL Maxims

By Robert Ferringo

OK, I have to get this out, just so I'm on the record. There are three things that I see nearly every weekend that simply drive me crazy and make absolutely no sense, yet have become accepted maxims in the unwritten NFL Coach's Handbook. Let's handle them one at a time, in no particular order:

1) The Pooch Kick.

There is only one acceptable time for a pooch kick, and even then I'm not a fan of it. If you are in the lead and there are less than five seconds left in the game, go ahead an pooch it. If there are more than five seconds on the clock and you pooch it you are a god damn idiot. Lovie Smith, who is a god damn idiot, proved this point yesterday. But this isn't an emotional reaction to a failed decision on Sunday. The match clearly supports my case that the pooch kick is absolutely ridiculous.

In 2007 there were 1,622 total kickoff returns made by the Top 100 return men (according to kickoff return average) in the NFL. Of those more than 1,600 kickoffs just 25 of them were returned for a touchdown. That is just 1.5 percent of the total kicks and you have about a 1-in-100 odds of that happening. Further, of those 1,622 kickoffs just 102 of them were returned for 40 or more yards (that includes the 25 touchdowns). That means that teams have a 6.3 percent chance of returning a kick past their own 40-yard line. And if you even want to narrow the research further - including only the Top 50 kickoff men in the NFL - there were 1,070 total kickoffs and just 80 returns of 40 or more yards (7.5 percent).

So by pooch kicking you are defending against something that has a less than two percent chance of happening (return for a TD) and something that has about a seven percent chance of happening (return of 40 or more yards). That makes absolutely no sense. But beyond that, the time management aspect doesn't add up either (especially if there are 15 seconds or less left in the game). It has to take a return man at least seven seconds to catch the ball at or near the goal line and return it to the 45-yard line. And that's being generous. So if that's the case, now your opponent has the ball at or near midfield (that is if they managed a 40+ return, which happens once in every 13 kickoffs) but only has time for one, or maybe two, plays. Tops. And, again, that's generous.  But by pooching the ball you give the opponent field position AND more time for more plays. Again - pooch kicks make absolutely zero sense.

2) Going For Two.

There is only one time when you should be going for a two-point conversion: WHEN YOU ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO. If you see a coach going for two any time before the fourth quarter, they are a god damn idiot. Just ask John Fox, who blew Carolina's Super Bowl against the Patriots by going for two too early. You should never, ever, ever, ever go for two before the fourth quarter. There is simply too much game left to be played.

(I shouldn't say "never". I guess if it's near the end of the third quarter, you are down by 24 or more points, and you score a TD I guess you can go for two. But I still don't like it.)

If your team is down by 15 in the fourth quarter and they score a touchdown - DON'T GO FOR TWO. Wait until the next score, when you absolutely have to go for it. If they are down 11 and get a touchdown with more than about 10 minutes left - DON'T GO FOR TWO. If you miss and the other team gets a field goal you now have to score a TD, when two field goals are statistically easier to come by in the last 10 minutes of a game. Think about it. You really shouldn't be going for two unless there is less than about six minutes to play and you absolutely have to. And in 80 percent of instances you shouldn't be going for two unless there is less than three minutes to play. But there are exceptions. Again, teams put themselves in a bigger hole too often by trying for a conversion too early when there is still SO much ball left to be played.

What coaches never seem to take into account is, "If I go for two now - AND THE OTHER TEAM SCORES - what does that do to our ability to come back." Coaches going for a two always seem to have tunnel vision and think about what the math is as long as they keep scoring and stop the other team from scoring. Well, if you could stop the other team from scoring any time you wanted you probably wouldn't be behind and needing to go for two.

3) The 10-Point Deficit.

If you are down, in the last three minutes of the game, and you need a combination of a touchdown and a field goal, and you are facing a fourth-and-more than two in COMFORTABLE field goal range, you need to take the three points. I don't care if you are inside a team's 20-yard-line. If there is 1:40 left in the game and it's fourth-and-four at the opponents 18-yard-line, you need to kick the field goal. The only X-factor is if you managed to save all three of your timeouts. But that is rarely the case.

There are a ton of different situations where this comes up, but the reasoning is simple:

If you are down two scores in a late-game situation like that (and most times teams don't have their timeouts) then the entire game comes down to the onsides kick. That is your world. If you are down two scores then it doesn't matter if you get a field goal or a touchdown with the first possession. It doesn't. You need an onsides kick. If you don't get the onsides kick, you have ZERO chance to win. By kicking a field goal - even when it seems like you are so close to a touchdown - you move on to the next step (the onsides kick). If you go for it and don't pick up the first down your game is over. It's over when you had a chance to extend the game. (This mode of thought counts for the 11-point deficit as well.)

A perfect example is a team down 10 points, facing fourth-and-eight from the opponents 24-yard line, with 48 seconds to play. You don't go for the first down. That is stupid. You kick the 41- or 42-yard field goal, and then move onto the onsides kick. You don't burn more time and put the entire game on the line trying to get the first down.

I guarantee you that next weekend AT LEAST one of those situations will present itself. And the odds are that the coach is going to make the wrong decision. But forget what the "NFL Coach's Handbook" says. The above instructions is the way to play it. The math supports it and there is no arguing with the math.

NFL Coaching Is Almost As Bad As NFL Quarterbacking Right Now

By Robert Ferringo

There is no doubt that we are in the midst of a quarterback transition in the NFL. The Old Guard of quarterback names that have dominated the last 15 years are laying out their swan song and the Next Wave is still cutting its teeth and finding its way in The League. As a result, the NFL market has never been so volatile from a betting standpoint.

I will deal with that at another time. But the bottom line is that inexperienced and shaky quarterback play is making the league a crap shoot. (I mean, when Kurt Warner, Kerry Collins, and Brett Favre - three turnover machines - are considered the "steady veterans" what does that tell you?) But I think that the state of head coaching in the NFL may never have been worse off than it is right now. The caliber of NFL head coaches is in the toilet, and that, coupled with the QB issue, is just making a hard thing that much harder.

For example, is there any doubt why Tennessee, Indianapolis, Philadelphia, Carolina, and Tampa Bay are among the top teams in the league? Look at the combined experience of the coaches and quarterbacks. By that same rationale, are you stunned that Oakland, Houston, and San Francisco are all struggling? Now, there are retorts. Seattle has a veteran head coach and quarterback and they stink. But injuries and a brutal travel schedule have torn that team up. And Atlanta and Washington are winning despite young QB-head coaching combos. Well, Atlanta is primed for a second-half collapse and were routed by (not surprisingly) Carolina and Tampa Bay this year. And Washington just lost to St. Louis at home as a double-digit underdog.

Here are four examples of where inexperience at the quarterback position directly affected or potentially effected  the outcome of a game and a wager:

1) Jacksonville - What the hell were they doing with a 14-point lead and the ball with 11 minutes left? They threw three straight passes - two of them incomplete - and completely let Denver back into the ballgame. Were it not for a phantom pass interference call on Jacksonville's final drive the total and/or the spread could have been blown simply because Del Rio didn't do what he clearly should have and try to run some clock.

2) Arizona - The Cardinals ended up winning the ball game, so no one is going to get on Ken Whisenhunt for how he conducted his game plan. But why did he call a timeout before Nick Folk attempted was attempting a game-tying field goal? Talk about out-smarting yourself. First, anyone who watched the last few minutes of regulation saw that leading up to that play was a fuckfest. There were players all over the field. The officials made an odd offsides call, conferred for several minutes on that call, mis-spot the ball after the call, reviewed the call, and then eventually were like, "Screw it, let's play." The whole thing was bizarre and absurd. And Folk's attempt was blocked. But it didn't count, becauce Whisenhunt called TIMEOUT BEFORE THE SNAP! Nice try at a trick. But, first, it was an awful call. Why would you give the kicker and the Cowboys time to get themselves composed and figure out what was going on? The scene was chaos and this guy was trying to nail a 52-yarder for overtime. What more could you ask for? And second, if he had done any homework he would know that the Bills tried the exact same thing last year in Buffalo on Monday night and all it did was settle Folk down and he calmly nailed a 50-plus-yard field goal for the win. Awful move by a second-year coach.

3) San Francisco - J.T. O'Sullivan was trying to lead a comeback against Philadelphia. I get that. But he had two shots, with three timeouts and over four minutes left, to set up a game-winning or game-tying touchdown. The Niners had moved the ball on the Eagles all day. But he completely tightened up on his last two drives, and O'Sullivan's two turnovers led to an incredible cover by Philly. The score was 27-26 Philly with about five minutes left and San Fran getting the ball. San Fran was getting five points. The Eagles managed a field goal to go up four points, but the Niners were still set. That is, until O'Sullivan fumbled on the next possession (resulting in another Philly field goal) and then threw a pick-six on the possession after that (resulting in a 14-point lead for the Eagles). A bizarre turn of events for a guy who simply had not been in that situation.

4) Chicago - What is baffling about this is that it to the more experienced coach, and the guy who had been to the Super Bowl. Chicago scored a touchdown to cap a ridiculous comeback in Atlanta and take a 20-19 lead with 11 seconds left. Atlanta had its timeouts and just needed a field goal to win. So what did Lovie Smith decide to do: a pooch kickoff. The Bears kicked the ball to the Falcons at their 44-yard line! Unbelievable. In a dome, the Falcons really only needed to move about 16 yards to have a shot at a 57-yard field goal. Not out of the realm of possibility. So does Chicago go man-to-man or bring an extra pass rusher? No. They go into the same prevent defense that obviously lost them the game against  Tampa Bay. Again. Unreal. Atlanta completes a 26-yard pass to the sideline, gets out of bounds, and kicks the game winner. Why Chicago chose to pooch kick in that situation and give Atlanta an opportunity to win the game simply baffles me.

And the irony is that Chicago's QB-HC combo has four times as much experience as Atlanta. Which, again, shows the state of the NFL.

Good grief.

Sunday's LPOTB

I waffled on this game all week, but in the end decided to leave it off the card:

Take #210 Tampa Bay (-1.5) over Carolina (1 p.m., Sunday, Oct. 12)

I like it because even though the Bucs are the favorite here they are the side that is against the public. Nearly 70 percent of the public is on the Panthers coming into this one and the line movement - off the critical 3.0 and down to a 1.5 or 1.0 - reflects heavy, heavy Carolina money. And every trend and recent meeting points towards the Panthers. Oh, yeah, and Carolina is coming off a near-perfect performance in a shutout win over K.C. while Tampa stumbles in off a loss at Denver. And for all of those reasons - I like the Panthers. It's a counter play and it's a solid one. The Bucs play great at home and I like the switch back to Garcia. I think it's going to energize the offense and I do think that he will perform better in the red zone, which is really the thing that's killing the Bucs right now.

Some Keys To The Tampa-Boston Series

By Robert Ferringo

Looks like we have an exceptional series ahead of us between Boston and Tampa Bay for the right to represent the American League in the World Series. Here are some things that I will be looking at as I handicap this series and these games:

1) Road wins
This series is basically akin to a world-class tennis match, in that the first team to have its serve broken may be the loser. Tampa Bay simply dominates at home. The Rays are 55-17 in their last 72 at The Trop, and when they have played in front 30,000 or more fans they are a ridiculous 21-2. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that they will sell out on Friday and Saturday.

And in the last five years there might not be a tougher place for a road team to score a victory than Fenway Park. The crowd, the history, the quirks, and the fact that the Sox are pretty damn good all conspire against road teams in October.

So who will flinch first? Obviously, Boston needs to win at least one game at Tampa Bay in order to win the series. They swept the Angels in Los Angeles in the first round - and the Angels were nearly as strong as Tampa when it comes to winning at home. But the Red Sox were also swept twice and lost seven straight in Florida. Further, Boston is just 6-16 this year on turf.

But I also don't think that Tampa Bay can rely solely on the fact that they have home-field advantage and if they want to win this series I think they have to win at least one game in Fenway. If this series comes back to The Trop at 3-2, Boston, then I feel that the experience advantage that the Red Sox have will give them a big edge. Not only that, but if Boston sweeps three straight in Beantown then they will be riding a tremendous wave of momentum and I don't know if the young Rays will be able to stem that. These Red Sox have won multiple championships in the last four years. And you don't get to that point without being able to win some tough games on the road and showing a little salt.

2) Tampa Bay's young arms
The Rays are backing some serious stud arms in the postseason. James Shields and Scott Kazmir are as good of a one-two punch as any club in baseball. And Matt Garza is sneaky-good in the No. 3 hole.

However, there are some factors which could actually favor Boston in these matchups. First, James Shields is a wreck on the road. He has an ERA of 10.00 in Fenway and is 0-3 there this season. Second, the Red Sox are one of the best teams in the league against left-handed pitching. They have been in the Top 5 in hitting southpaws all year. Again, give them two cracks at Kazmir and I think they get one of them. Third, do you really trust Matt Garza? Finally, the Red Sox took on Cleveland last year when C.C. Sabathia and Fausto Carmona were simply devastating the league. They took down the Indians. Now you tell me who is better right now: 2008 Shields-Kazmir or

3) The Wakefield Effect
Tim Wakefield's butterfly knuckleballs could hold the key to this entire series. He's slated to throw Game 4 in Boston and no matter what the situation it's going to be a critical outing. Someone is like to be up 2-1, either way, and that game will be the fulcrum on which the series is shaped.

On one hand, Wakefield has been a money pitcher in the postseason for Boston. He has come up huge in many a big situation over the last five or six years and this would be yet another tricky spot for the crafty knuckler. His counterpart would likely be Andy Sonnanstine, a youngster with no idea what it's like to throw in a game of this import. Also, Wakefield OWNS the Rays in his career. He is 19-5 in 31 career starts against Tampa Bay and is 10-2 against them at home.

On the other hand, it's feast or famine for Wakefield. If Tampa is on the knuckler, if the ump has a tight zone, or if Wakefield just doesn't have control, the Rays could throw up a five-spot early in the game and take the crowd right out of it. Wakefield is 0-2 with a 5.87 ERA against the Rays this year in three starts. I think his start will make or break the series.

4) Varitek vs. Navarro
I think that the running game for both teams is going to be critical. Manufacturing runs and staying out of double plays to manage big innings could turn the tide for one side or the other. Tampa is full of players who like to run, particularly Crawford, Upton, Bartlett, and Iwamora. The Red Sox have some guys that can move as well (Ellsbury, Crisp). But the difference is that Navarro is No. 2 in the Major Leagues in terms of catching base stealers (38.7 percent) while Jason Varitek is the fourth-worst at throwing out runners (22.2 percent) of the everyday backstops. If Tampa is running all over Varitek and the Boston pitchers - and remember that the threat of running and how that effects a pitcher can sometimes be even more impactful than an actual stolen base - then the Red Sox are screwed. On the flip side, if Navarro can keep key Boston baserunners at bay in late-inning situations that is another big benefit for the Rays.

5) Closer Comparison
This one is pretty simple. The Red Sox have Jon Papelbon, who is one of the best in the business. He is a proven postseason stud and is a hammer at the end of games. The Rays relied on Troy Percival, another proven veteran stopper at the back end of a game, for most of the year. But Percy is out for the year and there is still a void at the end of the Rays pen. Tampa has been fine through the regular season and even against the White Sox without a "true" closer. But if they get into a Game 7 and they have a one-run lead in the ninth inning, who are they going to go to and will he be able to get the job done?

Cantwell To Start For Louisivlle Tonight

Louisville's Hunter Cantwell will start this evening for the Louisville Cardinals as they head to Memphis to take on the shaky Tigers. There were questions about his ankle, but by all indications he is fine.

The line movement on this game, however, is suspicious because it hasn't moved the way of U of L despite the good news about its quarterback. The spread on this game opened at 5.5 and slid up to 7.0. But in the last 24 hours it has dipped back down to 6.5, through a key number. This suggests some heavy action on the Tigers, who will likely be playing in front of a raucous primetime crowd.

Some other key stats from this game are that the home team is 4-1 ATS in this series, the underdog is 8-1 ATS, and Memphis is 5-1 ATS in the last six. Further, before last night's chalk (Wake Forest, Houston) came through with two wins and two covers, there had been five straight upsets in primetime ESPN games.

Home teams started off the season as an automatic play in these weekday ESPN matchups. However, even last night's 2-0 ATS run by the home teams brings the host's mark to just 7-6 ATS over the last four weeks.

From ESPN:

Louisville should be as close to full health on offense as it's been all season this week at Memphis.

Kragthorpe also said that quarterback Hunter Cantwell, who suffered a lateral sprain of his left ankle in the Sept. 26 Connecticut game, is fine and could have played if the Cardinals had a game last week.

Head coach Steve Kragthorpe said on the Big East coaches' teleconference that receiver Scott Long should make his season debut Friday. Long, who broke a bone in his foot in August, has been practicing full speed during the Cardinals' bye week, Kragthorpe said. Long was expected to serve as the team's No. 1 wideout.

This Just In: The Cubs Still Suck

By Vegas Sports Informer

For you die-hard Chicago Cubs fans, like myself, I have to ask: are we cursed or what? Come on: four errors in one game and all four come from the infield. Being a Chicago Cubs fan you expect the unexpected and you will see some crazy outcomes. This Dodgers series was no exception. I bleed Cubs blue and now I’m starting to realize that maybe, just maybe, I will never see the Chicago Cubs hold up a World Series title. It’s even hard for me to say, “Wait Until Next Year”!

Here are two games that I have my eye on this week:

LSU at Florida (Saturday 10/11) NCAAF
HUGE game in Florida on Saturday night and this game could be the best game on the board to watch. The game is between the LSU Tigers and their tough in-your-face-defense against Tim Tebow and the Florida Gators' high-powered offense. The LSU Tigers have struggled against the spread with the Gators but have covered the spread in four of the last five meetings. Both teams have scored TD’s at will this season but this game should show some great defense. I’m looking to play the 'under'.

New England at San Diego (Sunday 10/12) NFL
San Diego needs this win at home and playing the Patriots without Tom Brady in San Diego means they could finally beat New England. San Diego is coming off a bad loss to Miami and if the Chargers lose this game at home their playoff chances might as well be thrown out the window.

(Image courtesy of Oddjack.com)

Listed Quarterbacks? VSI Says It's The Way To Go

By Vegas Sports Informer

 I’m in the process of researching this new rule that I’m trying to pass on all sports books and online books: how about we can list quarterbacks when we wager on a football games, just like is the norm in baseball betting. And just like in baseball if your pitcher doesn’t start then you can get a refund or an adjusted number. Makes sense, doesn’t it?

The reason why I’m talking about this is because the last two Sunday’s we had QB changes that affected our plays. In Week 4 the Cincinnati Bengals announced Sunday morning that Carson Palmer would not play and their back-up QB was some taxi driver for Tijuana. Then last Sunday, in Week 5, the Houston Texans announced about an hour before kickoff that Matt Schaub wasn’t playing and Sage Rosenfels was their starting QB. Sage played well, but still, listed QB’s would’ve definitely helped on my football plays. Just a suggestion, and this would probably never fly, but it’s nice to dream!