Comments on: Super Bowl Upsets http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/super-bowl-upsets/ People don't think it be like it is, but it do. Sun, 20 May 2012 08:49:55 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7 by: Cliffy http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/super-bowl-upsets/#comment-1025 Tue, 05 Feb 2008 13:24:47 +0000 http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/super-bowl-upsets/#comment-1025 The Jets-Colts upset is, and in my mind always will be, the greatest SB upset. Not only were they the biggest underdog, but keep in mind they were the inferior team from the inferior *league* - still AFL/NFL at that time. Course, as Tank noted, the "inferior" AFL then won SB IV as well (despite the big underdog status) - and the mighty NFL realized that, "Hmmm... maybe these guys can play a little"... and the merger happened. But *nobody* gave the Jets a chance... no... bod...y. Behind that, I would put this Giants-Pats on par with Pats-Rams, if only for the similarity of the respective teams seemingly proving the old adage that "Defense wins Championships" and (usually) a great defense will stop a great offense. But I'd still put both behind the Chiefs/Vikings SB 4 - simply cuz, again, I sincerely doubt too many people really gave the Chiefs a chance - being from the "inferior" league, and all. As we all know, point spreads are designed to get even money from both sides - so the book collects its vig and makes a profit, regardless of outcome. As such, we need to recognize that Vegas, et al, set the lines with *that* in mind - not necessarily with any analytical conclusion of the true relative merits of the teams. The Giants beat three division winners on the road, including the two that everyone expected to compete in the NFC Championship Game for the "right" to be roadkill for the Pats. The Giants *are* a very good team - most importantly, with a very good defense. Yes, I predicted a Pats blowout cuz... well, I'm an idiot - but moreso, cuz I really, really, really wanted to believe it would happen. I ignored that the Pats hadn't covered a spread since October i.e. public perception was not in line with actual performance regarding the Pats recent results. I heard someone suggest that the Packers would've been fodder for the Pats cuz they would've not been able to get to Brady like the Giants did - but their stubborn insistence to allow Plax to have a career day prevented that. I dunno about that - but I do know that the Giants defense played great, but not necessarily above their heads... if I'd chosen to try to take an unbiased look at it. Many people were making the case for the Giants to at least make it a game (i.e. less than 12-pt margin), and some even picked them outright... about the same amount that picked the Pats, although I submit fewer thought the Pats would compete with Rams than thought the Giants would compete with the Pats. In short, to me: 1. Jets over Colts, 2. Chiefs over Vikings, 3. Pats over Rams, 4. Giants over Pats... but I wouldn't quibble if someone insisted on switching my #3 and #4. The Jets-Colts upset is, and in my mind always will be, the greatest SB upset. Not only were they the biggest underdog, but keep in mind they were the inferior team from the inferior *league* - still AFL/NFL at that time. Course, as Tank noted, the “inferior” AFL then won SB IV as well (despite the big underdog status) - and the mighty NFL realized that, “Hmmm… maybe these guys can play a little”… and the merger happened.

But *nobody* gave the Jets a chance… no… bod…y.

Behind that, I would put this Giants-Pats on par with Pats-Rams, if only for the similarity of the respective teams seemingly proving the old adage that “Defense wins Championships” and (usually) a great defense will stop a great offense. But I’d still put both behind the Chiefs/Vikings SB 4 - simply cuz, again, I sincerely doubt too many people really gave the Chiefs a chance - being from the “inferior” league, and all.

As we all know, point spreads are designed to get even money from both sides - so the book collects its vig and makes a profit, regardless of outcome. As such, we need to recognize that Vegas, et al, set the lines with *that* in mind - not necessarily with any analytical conclusion of the true relative merits of the teams.

The Giants beat three division winners on the road, including the two that everyone expected to compete in the NFC Championship Game for the “right” to be roadkill for the Pats. The Giants *are* a very good team - most importantly, with a very good defense. Yes, I predicted a Pats blowout cuz… well, I’m an idiot - but moreso, cuz I really, really, really wanted to believe it would happen. I ignored that the Pats hadn’t covered a spread since October i.e. public perception was not in line with actual performance regarding the Pats recent results.

I heard someone suggest that the Packers would’ve been fodder for the Pats cuz they would’ve not been able to get to Brady like the Giants did - but their stubborn insistence to allow Plax to have a career day prevented that. I dunno about that - but I do know that the Giants defense played great, but not necessarily above their heads… if I’d chosen to try to take an unbiased look at it. Many people were making the case for the Giants to at least make it a game (i.e. less than 12-pt margin), and some even picked them outright… about the same amount that picked the Pats, although I submit fewer thought the Pats would compete with Rams than thought the Giants would compete with the Pats.

In short, to me: 1. Jets over Colts, 2. Chiefs over Vikings, 3. Pats over Rams, 4. Giants over Pats… but I wouldn’t quibble if someone insisted on switching my #3 and #4.

]]>