fun fact - 43-8

hawknation2014

New member
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
2,812
Reaction score
0
It was also the largest margin of victory by an underdog in Super Bowl history.
 

SalishHawkFan

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
5,872
Reaction score
0
only complete idiots would think we were the underdog. Vegas gave the edge to Denver because it knows most of its bettors are complete idiots.
 

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
It also shattered the record for profits in Vegas, since a huge number of people bet on Denver. I think I read that Vegas made more off of XLVIII than the three previous SBs combined. Vegas actually favored Seattle at first to get people to bet on Denver and it paid off in a huge way.
 

Hawkspur

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2011
Messages
1,450
Reaction score
0
kearly":30gmpi5q said:
It also shattered the record for profits in Vegas, since a huge number of people bet on Denver. I think I read that Vegas made more off of XLVIII than the three previous SBs combined. Vegas actually favored Seattle at first to get people to bet on Denver and it paid off in a huge way.

I made my own record profits betting on this Superbowl too, so me and Vegas were both happy. Betting on the blowout came up trumps!
 

hawksfansinceday1

Active member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
24,629
Reaction score
3
Location
Vancouver, WA
kearly":13jmp8o6 said:
It also shattered the record for profits in Vegas, since a huge number of people bet on Denver. I think I read that Vegas made more off of XLVIII than the three previous SBs combined. Vegas actually favored Seattle at first to get people to bet on Denver and it paid off in a huge way.
Yeah we opened as 2 point favs after the win in the NFCCG and in like 1 hour it was immediately bet up to Donkeys favored by 3.
 

JZ#1

New member
Joined
Mar 15, 2014
Messages
193
Reaction score
0
There are a lot of people that know nothing about football. I didn't think the game would be a slamdunk for the Seahawks. But I definitely thought the game was a great matchup for them. I thought that Peyton would do a better job spreading out the hawks defense. Peyton played terrible. Suddenly he couldn't rely on his BS crossing routes that most of the AFC teams had no answer for. The Seahawks defense played a fantastic game. That one interception to Malcolm Smith was like a fly ball in batting practice.
 

Escamillo

New member
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
285
Reaction score
0
hawknation2014":v8mh0or9 said:
It was also the largest margin of victory by an underdog in Super Bowl history.

And on a related note, it was the largest margin of covering the point spread in SB history. Seahawks covered the spread by 37.5 points (actually, anywhere from 37 to 38 points, depending on which line one looks at). hehe

Also, Vegas evidently keeps track of "smart money" bets vs general public bets. The "smart money" are the professional gamblers, those that actually make their living based on betting year-round. The smart money overwhelmingly picked the Seahawks, but the general public overwhelmingly picked Broncos. The fools!!! lol
 

Seahwkgal

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
5,102
Reaction score
205
JZ#1":725btf5g said:
There are a lot of people that know nothing about football. I didn't think the game would be a slamdunk for the Seahawks. But I definitely thought the game was a great matchup for them. I thought that Peyton would do a better job spreading out the hawks defense. Peyton played terrible. Suddenly he couldn't rely on his BS crossing routes that most of the AFC teams had no answer for. The Seahawks defense played a fantastic game. That one interception to Malcolm Smith was like a fly ball in batting practice.
Thanks to Cliff Avril. Damn our D was damned ferocious. We got a lot of pressure on Manning. It was deceptive reading most stat lines. The real good ones listed hurries and hits after passes. The D was in his face all night long. When that happens, Manning crumbles. I thought it was funny how ignorant the Donkey fans were about the NFC West and the actually facts about our team. Coming into the game, we had just faced some of the toughest defensive teams in the NFL. The NFC West has some seriously tough D's. It's no surprise that most Donkey fans don't know this or don't bother watching any NFC West team play in prime time. I knew that our Offense was going to take care of business vs their much weaker Defense(compared to NO, SF, AZ, St. Louis).
 

irocdave

New member
Joined
Dec 21, 2011
Messages
1,481
Reaction score
0
Seahwkgal":3nirdryl said:
JZ#1":3nirdryl said:
There are a lot of people that know nothing about football. I didn't think the game would be a slamdunk for the Seahawks. But I definitely thought the game was a great matchup for them. I thought that Peyton would do a better job spreading out the hawks defense. Peyton played terrible. Suddenly he couldn't rely on his BS crossing routes that most of the AFC teams had no answer for. The Seahawks defense played a fantastic game. That one interception to Malcolm Smith was like a fly ball in batting practice.
Thanks to Cliff Avril. Damn our D was damned ferocious. We got a lot of pressure on Manning. It was deceptive reading most stat lines. The real good ones listed hurries and hits after passes. The D was in his face all night long. When that happens, Manning crumbles. I thought it was funny how ignorant the Donkey fans were about the NFC West and the actually facts about our team. Coming into the game, we had just faced some of the toughest defensive teams in the NFL. The NFC West has some seriously tough D's. It's no surprise that most Donkey fans don't know this or don't bother watching any NFC West team play in prime time. I knew that our Offense was going to take care of business vs their much weaker Defense(compared to NO, SF, AZ, St. Louis).

Lol, Donkey fans were living in lala land. Your posts reminds me of Brandon Browner's response to Pierre Garcon's comments during an interview before the Hawks beat them in the playoffs. After the receiver was shut down Sherman and Browner were interviewed and asked about this receivers comments. Browner had that no BS look in his eyes and said something along the lines " I bet he do now".
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nf ... r/1811157/

Garcon getting his but kicked by BB.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YO4n52HalM
 

Hawks46

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
7,498
Reaction score
0
Escamillo":14v5d017 said:

Well, I was surprised at some of the reasoning of these guys. I thought PFF was a little more grounded. The 1st guy claimed Denver had a "very good defense". They only had a very good run defense, their secondary was suspect and that was obvious before the game.

One of the guys based his on nothing but emotion. Denver had "been there" more than the Seahawks.

I'm going to laugh this year......AFC West plays the NFC West. Funny thing is, after the game, a lot of Donkey fans were claiming WE didn't beat the Broncos, but the Broncos beat themselves. They Donks are in for four more beatings this year....they just got a taste of the ferocity of the NFCW.
 

Hawks46

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
7,498
Reaction score
0
Yea, I'm going to miss Browner. I think Maxwell was better in coverage, but man....Browner just blew up screen plays to his side. People just quit throwing those. BB always seemed to come up with the big play as well.
 

HawkWow

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2012
Messages
6,740
Reaction score
0
Location
The 5-0
kearly":37urcwkm said:
It also shattered the record for profits in Vegas, since a huge number of people bet on Denver. I think I read that Vegas made more off of XLVIII than the three previous SBs combined. Vegas actually favored Seattle at first to get people to bet on Denver and it paid off in a huge way.

Vegas felt Seattle was the better team and made us a 1-2 pt opening fav. Then, testing that line, they invited preferred customers to bet that line. The first several bet Denver, so to balance the books, they had to make Denver the favorite to get people to bet Seattle.

A portion of the $19 mil they profited, off of $119 million bet, came from the under bets.

Some bettors refuse to understand they are not betting against Vegas, and if they were, they'd lose 90% of the time. Vegas has lost just twice on SBs in the past 20+ years. Typically, that's from being middled. Again, their objective is to take even money on both sides, including the O/U, then swoop the vig from those losers while making a mint off (foolish) prop bets.
 

RolandDeschain

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
33,116
Reaction score
941
Location
Kissimmee, FL
It amuses me that so many people in the world still think Vegas bases their odds on who they believe will win. That's like the last piece of criteria on their list of things to go by when determining the lines.
 

Subzero717

Active member
Joined
Nov 5, 2010
Messages
10,005
Reaction score
14
Location
Is Everything
RolandDeschain":jawezkb0 said:
It amuses me that so many people in the world still think Vegas bases their odds on who they believe will win. That's like the last piece of criteria on their list of things to go by when determining the lines.

I dont think its even on the criteria.
 
Top