Final Four Opening Line Report
By Colin Kelly
Covers.com
Since the NCAA Tournament’s round of 64 began March 17, we’ve seen a flurry of 60 games in 11 days while watching the field whittled down to the Final Four. Now, there’s only one No. 1 seed standing, along with a pair of No. 2s and a stunning No. 10.
No. 10 Syracuse vs. No. 1 North Carolina (-9.5)
Syracuse is the odd man in and will face No. 1 North Carolina on one side of the bracket in next Saturday’s Final Four in Houston. The Orange rallied from a 15-point second-half deficit against No. 1 Virginia to post a shocking 68-62 victory as an 8-point underdog in Sunday’s Midwest Region final. Trailing 54-39, the Orange (23-13 SU, 20-15 ATS) outscored the Cavaliers 29-8 over the final 9½ minutes.
Syracuse is the first No. 10 seed to reach the Final Four, and the Orange will be prohibitive underdogs to the Tar Heels, who opened as 9.5-point favorites. North Carolina pulled away from No. 6 Notre Dame 88-74 as a 9.5-point chalk in Sunday’s East Region final. It was the ninth consecutive SU win for the Tar Heels (32-6 SU, 19-18-1 ATS), who are also on a 7-1 spread-covering streak.
Jay Kornegay, executive vice president for race and sports at the Westgate Las Vegas Superbook, told Covers that there wasn’t much debate on the opening line.
“We had a 9, a 10, a 9.5, so we were all really close. It wasn’t a long discussion,” Kornegay said. “I’m sure the public will be on the favorite. The guessing game is where the big money will come in at. The numbers are so good that you don’t see the big money sometimes.”
It’s a rare instance that an NCAA semifinal has a spread approaching double digits.
“It’s a pretty big number for a Final Four game, so I’d suspect we’ll see a little Syracuse money,” Kornegay said. “We think 9.5 is a good number for the sharps. If the public drives it up to double digits, it wouldn’t surprise me to see a bigger play on the underdog.”
The Golden Nugget didn’t post a number on Sunday night, but oddsmaker Aaron Kessler was a little surprised the early line wasn’t a little higher.
“Notre Dame is no worse than Syracuse, and North Carolina has been nothing but impressive at every stop,” Kessler said. “We’ll probably be on the high side of that number. I’ve got to anticipate a lot of public money on Carolina in this one.”
Kessler said he sees a lot of similarities between Notre Dame and Syracuse – which bodes well for the Tar Heels.
“It’s a good matchup for them, kind of like the Notre Dame game,” he said. “North Carolina is the bigger, stronger team, by a lot. Carolina’s just got great athletes at every position.”
No. 2 Villanova (-2) vs. No. 2 Oklahoma
Villanova advanced with a 64-59 victory as a 2-point underdog against overall No. 1 seed Kansas in the South Region final Saturday. Oklahoma was a 1-point pup in Saturday’s West Region final against Oregon, but rolled to an 80-68 victory.
The ‘Cats (33-5 SU) are barely above water against the oddsmakers, at 19-17 ATS this season, though the Sooners (29-7 SU) are just 14-20 ATS, which rates 317th in the nation. However, this game is a rematch of a Dec. 7 regular-season meeting on a neutral floor in Hawaii, where the Sooners, catching 5 points, boat raced the Wildcats 78-55.
Kessler was a bit surprised with where the line sits at this point.
“Oklahoma has been a very public team this year, so I think Villanova’s upset of Kansas has already come into play,” Kessler said. “I tend to think the line might come down a little bit. I’m not sure we’ll see a flip, but I think it will go lower before it goes higher. If it goes up to 3, I’ll probably be in line!”
The matchup of No. 2 seeds is the more interesting one, according to Kornegay, who said the Superbook opened at Villanova -1.5 but has since moved to 2.
“I expect this one to be pretty solid, and the more popular game to wager on,” he said. “This is a more intriguing matchup. There’ll be support for both teams here.”
Final Four Betting Trends
By Marc Lawrence
VegasInsider.com
NCAA Final Four Out
It’s onward to Houston for the Final Four games. To put the wraps on the 2016 NCAA Tournament, listed below are some interesting trends and angles to as our Fab Four heads off to H-Town this weekend.
All results listed below are ATS (Against The Spread) and are since 1991 unless noted otherwise.
NCAA FINAL 4 ROUND NOTES
#1 Seed favorites 4 or more pts are 1-4 ATS since 2012 (North Carolina)
#2 Seed favorites are 3-7 ATS (Villanova)
#8 or lower Seeds are 2-4-1 ATS (Syracuse)
Favorites off a win of 14 or more points are 3-7 ATS (North Carolina)
Favorites 4 or more pts who scored 80 > pts in Elite 8 round are 7-14 ATS (North Carolina)
Teams who are 4-0 ATS last 4 games are 11-15-2 ATS (Syracuse, Villanova)
Teams with revenge are 4-11 ATS (Villanova)
Teams off BB DD wins are 8-15 ATS (North Carolina, Oklahoma)
ACC favorites of more than 5 points are 1-4 ATS (North Carolina)
Big East favorites are 1-3 ATS (Villanova)
The dog in Big 12 games is 6-1 SUATS (Oklahoma)
NCAA CHAMPIONSHIP GAME NOTES
#1 Seed favorites are 14-4 SU and 11-7 ATS
#2 Seeds are 3-7 SU and 4-6 ATS (0-5 SU & 1-4 ATS vs. #1 Seeds)
#5 or worse Seeds are 1-6 SU & 2-5 ATS
Favorites of 5 or less pts are 12-3 SUATS
Teams with a win percentage of .850 or greater are 12-6 SUATS since 1998
Teams with a win percentage of .810 or less are 3-7 SUATS since 2000
Favorites who scored 80 or more pts in the Final 4 round are 5-1 ATS
Favorites who score 80 or more in Final Four game are 5-1 SUATS since 1998
Dogs who allowed 60 or more pts in the Final 4 round are 2-13 SU & 4-11 ATS
Dogs of 3 > pts off a SU dog win are 1-6 ATS since 1998
ACC teams are 5-1 SU and 4-2 ATS versus #2 or lower seeds
Big East teams are 6-1 SUATS
Big 12 teams are 1-3 SUATS
COACH ME UP
North Carolina’s Roy Williams is:
68-22 SU and 50-39-1 ATS in NCAA tournament
191-79 SU and 132-131-7 ATS vs. ACC
21-5 SU and 16-10 ATS vs. Big East
112-32 SU and 72-71-1 ATS vs. Big 12
4-4 SU and 3-5 ATS vs. Boeheim
3-1 SU and 2-2 ATS vs. Kruger
3-0 SU and 2-1 ATS vs. Wright
Oklahoma’s Lon Kruger is:
16-12 SU and 13-15 ATS in NCAA tournament
9-10 SU and 12-7 ATS vs. ACC
14-7 SU and 12-7 ATS vs. Big East
0-0 SU and 0-0 ATS vs. Boeheim
1-3 SU and 2-2 ATS vs. Williams
1-0 SU and 1-0 ATS vs. Wright
Syracuse’s Jim Boeheim is:
39-18 SU and 32-23-2 ATS in NCAA tournament
47-29 SU and 34-39-3 ATS vs. ACC
12-6 SU and 12-6 ATS vs. Big 12
294-164 SU and 221-231-5 ATS vs. Big East
0-0 SU and 0-0 ATS vs. Kruger
4-4 SU and 5-3 ATS vs. Williams
9-12 SU and 9-12 ATS vs. Wright
Villanova’s Jay Wright is:
18-10 SU and 14-14 ATS in NCAA tournament
4-1 SU and 3-2 ATS vs. ACC
2-3 SU and 3-2 ATS vs. Big East
3-1 SU and 4-0 ATS vs. Big 12
12-9 SU and 12-9 ATS vs. Boeheim
0-1 SU and 0-1 ATS vs. Kruger
0-3 SU and 1-2 ATS vs. Williams
There you have it, trends and notes of teams and coaches for the NCAA Final Four and out games played over the last 25 years.
Final Four Betting Props
VegasInsider.com
The Westgate Las Vegas SuperBook has posted both Player and Team Props for Saturday’s Final Four semifinal matchups.
Villanova and Oklahoma meet in the opener at 6:06 p.m. ET at NRG Stadium from Houston, Texas before Syracuse and North Carolina conclude the night with an 8:45 p.m. ET tip.
Listed below are all of the props per the SuperBook.
Villanova vs. Oklahoma
Player Props - Total Points Scored
Josh Hart* (Villanova)
Over 15 -110
Under 15 -110
Kris Jenkins* (Villanova)
Over 13½ -110
Under 13½ -110
Ryan Arcidiacono* (Villanova)
Over 12½ -110
Under 12½ -110
Daniel Ochefu* (Villanova)
Over 9½ -110
Under 9½ -110
Buddy Hield* (Oklahoma)
Over 25½ -110
Under 25½ -110
Jordan Woodward* (Oklahoma)
Over 13 -110
Under 13 -110
Isaiah Cousins* (Oklahoma)
Over 12 -110
Under 12 -110
Ryan Spangler* (Oklahoma)
Over 10 -110
Under 10 -110
Team Props
Total 3 Point Field Goals Made By Both Teams
Over 17½ -110
Under 17½ -110
Largest Lead of The Game By Either Team
Over 13½ -110
Under 13½ -110
Team To Score 10+ Points First
Villanova -115
Oklahoma -105
Team To Score 20+ Points First
Villanova -125
Oklahoma +105
Oklahoma Total Points
Over 71½ -110
Under 71½ -110
Villanova Total Points
Over 73½ -110
Under 73½ -110
North Carolina vs. Syracuse
Player Props - Total Points Scored
Michael Gbinije* (Syracuse)
Over 17 -110
Under 17 -110
Malachi Richardson* (Syracuse)
Over 13½ -110
Under 13½ -110
Trevor Cooney* (Syracuse)
Over 12½ -110
Under 12½ -110
Tyler Lydon* (Syracuse)
Over 10½ -110
Under 10½ -110
Brice Johnson* (North Carolina)
Over 18½ -110
Under 18½ -110
Joel Berry II* (North Carolina)
Over 13 -110
Under 13 -110
Marcus Paige* (North Carolina)
Over 12½ -110
Under 12½ -110
Justin Jackson* (North Carolina)
Over 11½ -110
Under 11½ -110
Team Props
Syracuse Total Points
Over 68 -110
Under 68 -110
North Carolina Total Points
Over 77 -110
Under 77 -110
Total 3 Point Field Goals Made By Both Teams
Over 13½ -110
Under 13½ -110
Largest Lead of The Game By Either Team
Over 17 -110
Under 17 -110
Team To Score 10+ Points First
Syracuse +160
North Carolina -180
Team To Score 20+ Points First
Syracuse +220
North Carolina -260
Final Four Betting Outlook
By Jim Feist
VegasInsider.com
It is a great week for sports fans with the start of baseball, the NBA stretch run, the Final Four and the culmination of the college basketball season next Monday at NRG Stadium in Houston, Texas for the national championship. It's clear that it's not the teams the start the season hot, but the ones that get hot when it really matters -- March and April!
Many things happen over the course of a long season. Some teams play great basketball in December and January, only to break down from injuries or run out of steam down the stretch. Iowa started 20-5 until the offense and defense started to struggle in late game situations, dropping six of eight down the stretch (1-7 against the spread run).
A year ago North Carolina started 17-4 but as February started the Tar Heels showed vulnerability, losing 6 of 10. It works the other way, too. A team can have a tough non-conference schedule or need time to work in new pieces, then get hot down the stretch. Two years ago Michigan State overcame injuries in mid-season before getting healthy - - and hot, ripping through the Big 10 tourney, 3-0 both SU and ATS.
It’s important to examine how a team played with overall stats, but also in three different sections: early non-conference play, conference play, then tournament time. Three years ago Miami started 22-3 before the national spotlight and a key injury took a toll, losing in the tourney to Marquette, 71-61.
Kansas and Duke always have the spotlight on them. This season the Jayhawks excellent down the stretch, with a sizzling 10-2 spread run, but Duke has had its troubles with youth and a key injury to its starting center, Amile Jefferson. A year ago Kansas started great, then had some erratic play down the stretch, including losses at Oklahoma, Kansas State, West Virginia, Oklahoma State and Iowa State.
The previous season the Jayhawks had a late season injury to 7-footer Joel Imbiid (11 ppg, 8 rpg), the Big 12 Defensive Player of the Year, a huge blow. The Jayhawks may have won the title eight years ago, but a decade ago it was a very different story: The Jayhawks started 20-1, only to go 3-6 straight up and 1-8 against the spread the last nine games. They never made it to the Final Four because of a 64-63 loss to Bucknell as a 13½-point favorite.
Other times an easy early season schedule, youth, bad coaching, untimely injuries, bad luck, poor team chemistry or a combination of these can cut down a potentially great team. Youth and a loss of its best players toppled Florida after winning back-to-back titles and prevented a North Carolina repeat in 2010. It is very easy for sports bettors to look into trends to try and predict the future. Trends can be helpful if there are reasons to support it. For example, from a betting perspective, what stands out about the last 11 Finals Fours?
2015
Michigan State 61
Duke 81 (-5, 139)
Wisconsin 71
Kentucky 64 (-5, 131)
2014
Florida 53 (-6.5, 126)
UConn 63
Wisconsin 73
Kentucky 74 (-2, 139)
2013
Wichita State 68
Louisville 72 (-11, 131)
Syracuse 56
Michigan 61 (-2, 131)
2012
Ohio State 62 (- 3, 136)
Kansas 64
Louisville 61
Kentucky 69 (-8, 136.5)
2011
Butler 70 (-3.5, 133)
VCU 62
Kentucky 55 (-2.5, 131)
UConn 56
2010
Butler 52 (-1.5, 125)
Michigan State 50
West Virginia 57
Duke 78 (-2.5, 130)
2009
Michigan State 82
UConn 73 (-4, 135)
North Carolina 83 (- 7.5, 160)
Villanova 69
2008
Kansas 84
North Carolina 66 (- 3, 158)
UCLA 63
Memphis 78 (-3, 135)
2007
Georgetown 60 (-1, 130)
Ohio State 67
UCLA 66
Florida 76 (- 3, 131)
2006
George Mason 58
Florida 73 (-6, 132)
LSU 45 (-2, 123)
UCLA 59
2005
Louisville 57
Illiniois 72 (-3, 144)
Michigan State 71
North Carolina 87 (-2, 153)
2004
Georgia Tech 67
Oklahoma State 65 (-4, 139)
UConn 79 (-2, 144)
Duke 78
2003
Marquette 61 (-4.5, 153.5)
Kansas 94
Syracuse 95
Texas 84 (-3, 153)
2002
Indiana 73
Oklahoma 64 (-6.5, 134)
Maryland 97
Kansas 88 (-1.5, 168)
What stands out is that it has been the day of the 'dog. The underdog is 16-10-1 against the number, with 13 'dogs winning straight up, including Wisconsin last year taking down mighty Kentucky and UConn two years ago. In addition, the games have gone 12-8 under the last 10 years. You can even make an argument that this would be the right time of the college hoops' season to take a shot with the dog on the money-line. However, this is where one needs patience, because trends can also be a fool's paradise.
If you go back to the previous fourthree Final Fours before that content analysis, 1999-01, we find Duke topping Maryland 95-84, Arizona blowing out Michigan State 80-61, Michigan State beating Wisconsin 53-41, Florida topping North Carolina 71-59, UConn beating Ohio State 64-58 and Duke surviving Michigan State 68-62. What stands out is that the favorite won and covered in five of six, for a hefty 5-1 spread record.
Even looking at totals, a similar pattern emerges. The last 14 years the "over/under" has been equal, 14-14 over/under in the Final Four. The three years before that the "under" prevailed at a 5-1 clip. All of a sudden, those who look solely at trends as the key to the sports betting kingdom are stuck at close to a .500 winning percentage ATS.
For the record, going back the last 20 years, there have been 24 "unders" and 16 "overs" in the Final Four, with 21 'dogs covering while 18 favorites have gotten the money with one push. Again, trends are worth examining, but there needs to be reasons behind them if you're serious about putting down hard earned money on a side. Perhaps the most significant stat that stands out is that 16 of the 21 'dogs that covered ended up winning the game outright, which shows how competitive and relatively evenly matched the games become when teams get this far in the season.