In my never-ending search for any information that would allow me to make intelligent prognostications for fantasy sports, I looked at this week's betting lines for Sunday's games. (I perused the college ones but only to see what the linesmakers think of UCONN's chances against ACC weakling Wake Forest. UCONN -6 Basically even on a neutral field.)
What struck me were the large number of double digit lines - Indy -13 vs HOU, BAL -11.5 vs OAK, Cincy -10.5 vs LE, SD -11.5 vs TEN and DEN -10.5 vs KC.
There is no way all five favorites are good enough to cover those spreads.
OK, how is that related to fantasy football?
With double digit lines, teams must either have a good offense and/or a great defense and play a team with bad ones of both.
Going down the list:
Indy - great offense plus Ok defense vs bad team
HOU - mediocre offense plus bad defense
Bal - mediocre/bad offense plus a top defense.
OAK - mediocre offense with good skills position players plus a mediocre defense.
Cin - great offense plus an "improved" defense.
CLE - mediocre/bad offense plus mediocre defense in a division game.
SD - mediocre offense plus a good defense
TEN - mediocre/bad offense plus a mediocre defense.
Den - mediocre offense plus a mediocre defense.
KC - mediocre offense with an elite RB plus a mediocre defense in a division game.
Do fantasy owners think Steve McNair can score 17+ points while the Ravens defense prevents fewer than 7 points against Randy Moss and Lamont Jordan?
Do fantasy owners believe Cleveland isn't going to be prepared for the Bengals offense after seeing them twice per season for time immemorial?
Is Denver so good that Larry Johnson won't be able to run on them?
San Diego may be able to shut out Tennessee, I admit. And Indianapolis is good enough to put 30+ on Houston, but the other three just don't have enough to be double-digit favorites.
Nevermind Chicago being 8.5 favorites versus Detroit. I do not believe in a REX Grossman offensive juggarnaut.