Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

We're Not The Underdogs?

beastson

By beastson,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

beastson Newbie

beastson

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It's called an upset because we are favored, not because of how an individual analyst sees the teams or outcome.

But we're going to lose

If you feel we're going to lose why call it an upset? I dont see how its an upset when its the first game of the season, anything can happen. Its not like its week 13 and we're the ones with the much better record. They are picking the Bucs cause of FA and preseason game against the Pats

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Floppin Grand Master

Floppin

Posted
Posted

But we're going to lose

If you feel we're going to lose why call it an upset? I dont see how its an upset when its the first game of the season, anything can happen. Its not like its week 13 and we're the ones with the much better record. They are picking the Bucs cause of FA and preseason game against the Pats

Because we are the odds favorite.........Like I meant, when I said "We are favored"........

Link to comment
Share on other sites
megadeth078 Newbie

megadeth078

Posted
Posted

Analysts don't go off Vegas, or should I say they shouldn't go off Vegas. They go off the tape, record, and who has the best players. You know that

If the analysts don't go off Vegas, then where does "upset" and "underdogs" come from?

I think that's what this thread is asking about. Not quite sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beastson Newbie

beastson

Posted
  • Author
Posted

If the analysts don't go off Vegas, then where does "upset" and "underdogs" come from?

I think that's what this thread is asking about. Not quite sure.

Both kinda go off the same thing, Im saying analysts don't go look at the odds and say oh they're the favorite. They have their own measures on who's who

What I'm saying is I don't get the term upset when both teams are 0-0, but since they're still picking them to win... doesn't that make them the favorite and we're the underdog?

The reason we're this "favorite" is cause of last year records, thats Vegas. I'm going off the analysts that actually digs deeper, which I said is obviously just off acquisitions and the game against the Pats. Thats ridiculous

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Floppin Grand Master

Floppin

Posted
Posted

Both kinda go off the same thing, Im saying analysts don't go look at the odds and say oh they're the favorite. They have their own measures on who's who

What I'm saying is I don't get the term upset when both teams are 0-0, but since they're still picking them to win... doesn't that make them the favorite and we're the underdog?

The reason we're this "favorite" is cause of last year records, thats Vegas. I'm going off the analysts that actually digs deeper, which I said is obviously just off acquisitions and the game against the Pats. Thats ridiculous

The terms: Favorite, Underdog, Upset, Odds-on Favorite, etc. - Have always been tied into odds. You seem to think that these terms are based on records and other factors, and to an extent they are, but records are usually indicators of the strength of a team. For instance, Vegas isn't going to favor a 2-11 team over a 14-0 team, it's just not going to happen (baring some extreme circumstance). So odds generally begin to fall in line with overall records. The odds for the initial part of the season are best guesses and analysis by the odds makers. If you think that Vegas just put this line up based on last years record then you are fuging clueless. They do just as much analysis as the people who write for ESPN, if not more.

Point is, the term "upset" is based on the vegas line, in this case, whether you want to accept that or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • frankw
      2025 Roster Cuts

      By frankw · Posted

      We have without question one of the worst QB rooms in the league and your key concern is people having the audacity to be talking about it lol.
    • DaveThePanther2008
      ESPN Top 100 for 2025

      By DaveThePanther2008 · Posted

      I saw this list crossing the screen waiting for any Panther.  Chubba, JC Horn and Hunt.  It was a crime to see so many that were not as good as these three.  ESPN is garbage anyhow.
    • 45catfan
      ESPN Top 100 for 2025

      By 45catfan · Posted

      Bingo!  We are on the same page.  Our scouting department was average under Hurney, but at least we hit hit it out of the park with our first rounders.  Our scouting department under Tepper's reign with his revolving doors of HCs and GMs has sucked because the scouts largely stay in place.  One or two may change every few years, but the core philosophy stays in place and I believe that to be heavily RAS influenced.    Looking the part of a football player (physical/athletic measurables) vastly outweighs putting on the tape and deep diving into his stats with our scouting department. Until we change that mindset, this team is doomed. Again, how many of us Huddlers (none of us are professional scouts) wanted McConkey over Legette? Yet, we went with XL.  Why?  RAS score, pure and simple.  If you put on the tape and look at the numbers without taking RAS into account, McConkey was the clear choice.
×
×
  • Create New...