All Forums | NFL Betting

5-0 ATS LAST 5 SUPER BOWLS TREND; 12-6-2 ATS TREND LAST 20 SUPER BOWLS; DETAILS INSIDE

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 5273
Posts: 32
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2006
Posts: 282
Posted: #1

Hey guys I been up doing research trying to find different trends for the Super Bowl and stumbled across a pretty strong one especially over the last 5 Super Bowls (5-0 ATS 100% Win %) and 12-6-2(67% Win %, the 2 don't qualify for the trend) since the 1991 Super Bowl.

 

Here is the trend:

"Teams that win by less points after their regular season bye week or lose outright after their regular season by week compared to their Super Bowl opponent are 5-0 ATS over the last 5 Super Bowls and 12-6-2 ATS since the 1991 Super Bowl."

 

Details Below:

 

1991 Super Bowl - NY Giants vs. Buffalo Bills (-7)

Result: 20-19 NY Giants Win SU

ATS Result: NY Giants (+7) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

NYG won by 4 vs. Washington

Bills won by 3 vs. NY Jets

 

Trend Result: Loss

 

1992 Super Bowl – Redskins (-7) vs. Buffalo Bills

Result: 37-24 Redskins Win SU

ATS Result: Redskins (-7) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

Redskins won by 4 vs. NY Giants

Bills won by 5 vs. New England Patriots

 

Trend Result: Win

 

1993 Super Bowl – Dallas Cowboys (-6.5) vs. Buffalo Bills

Result: 52-17 Dallas Cowboys Win SU

ATS Result: Dallas (-6.5) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

Dallas lost bye 24 vs. Philadelphia

Bills won by 4 vs. NY Jets

 

Trend Result: Win

 

 

 

 

1994 Super Bowl – Dallas Cowboys (-10.5) vs. Buffalo Bills

Result: 30-13 Dallas Cowboys Win SU

ATS Result: Dallas (-10.5) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

NOTE TEAMS HAD 2 BYE WEEKS IN THE 1994 SEASON

THEREFORE I DID NOT COUNT THIS IN MY RESULTS

OUT OF CURIOSITY HERE ARE BOTH AFTER BYE WEEK

RESULTS:

Dallas won by 13 vs. Philadelphia

Dallas won by 12 vs. Green Bay

Bills won by 9 vs. Jets

Bills lost by 9 vs. Miami

 

Trend Results: DOES NOT QUALIFY

 


 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2006
Posts: 282
Posted: #2

1995 Super Bowl – SF 49ers (-18.5) vs. SD Chargers

Result: 49-26 SF 49ers Win SU

ATS Result: SF 49ers (-18.5) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

SF 49ers won by 15 vs. Redskins

SD Chargers won by 14 vs. KC Chiefs

 

Trend Result: Loss

 

1996 Super Bowl – Dallas Cowboys (-13.5) vs. Pitt Steelers

Result: 27-17 Dallas Cowboys Win SU

ATS Result: Pitt (+13.5) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

Dallas won by 15 vs. Atlanta Falcons

Pitt lost by 18 vs. Cincinnati Bengals

 

Trend Result: Win

 

1997 Super Bowl – GB Packers (-13.5) vs. NE Patriots

Result: 35-21 GB Packers Win SU

ATS Result: GB Packers (-13.5) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

GB won by 6 vs. TB Bucs

NE won by 8 vs. Balt. Ravens

 

Trend Result: Win

 


 


 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2006
Posts: 282
Posted: #3

1998 Super Bowl – Denver Broncos vs. GB Packers (-11)

Result: 31-24 Denver Broncos Win SU

ATS Result: Denver (+11) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

Denver lost by 3 vs. Oakland Raiders

GB won by 18 vs. NE Patriots

 

Trend Result: Win

 

1999 Super Bowl – Denver Broncos (-7.5) vs. Atlanta Falcons

Result: 34-19 Denver Broncos Win SU

ATS Result: Denver (-7.5) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

Denver won by 13 vs. JAX

Atlanta lost by 11 vs. SF 49ers

 

Trend Result: Loss

 

2000 Super Bowl – St. Louis Rams (-7) vs. Tennessee Titans

Result: 23-16 St. Louis Rams Win SU

ATS Result: PUSH

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

Rams won by 28 vs. Atlanta

Titans won by 3 vs. Rams

 

Trend Result: Push

 

2001 Super Bowl – Baltimore Ravens (-3) vs. NY Giants

Result: 34-7 Baltimore Ravens Win SU

ATS Result: Ravens (-3) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

Ravens won by 21 vs. SD

Giants won by 17 vs. Philadelphia

 

Trend Result: Loss

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2006
Posts: 282
Posted: #4

2002 Super Bowl – NE Patriots vs. St. Louis Rams (-14)

Result: 20-17 NE Patriots Win SU

ATS Result: NE Patriots (+14) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

NE won by 32 vs. Carolina

Rams won by 34 vs. Carolina

 

Trend Result: Win

 

2003 Super Bowl – TB Buccaneers vs. Oakland Raiders (-4)

Result: 48-21 TB Bucs Win SU

ATS Result: TB Bucs (+4) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

TB won by 13 vs. Carolina

Oakland won by 27 vs. Titans

 

Trend Result: Win

 

2004 Super Bowl – NE Patriots (-7) vs. Carolina Panthers

Result: 32-29 NE Patriots Win SU

ATS Result: Carolina Panthers (+7) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

NE won by 12 vs. Dallas

Carolina won by 20 vs. Atlanta

 

Trend Result: Loss

 

2005 Super Bowl – NE Patriots (-7) vs. Philadelphia Eagles

Result: 24-21 NE Patriots Win SU

ATS Result: Philadelphia Eagles (+7) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

NE won by 14 vs. Bills

Philadelphia won by 22 vs. Carolina

 

Trend Result: Loss

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2006
Posts: 282
Posted: #5

2006 Super Bowl – Pittsburgh Steelers (-4) vs. Seattle Seahawks

Result: 21-10 Pittsburgh SU Win

ATS Result: Pittsburgh Steelers (-4) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

Pittsburgh won by 2 vs. SD Chargers

Seattle won by 14 vs. Arizona Cardinals

 

Trend Result: Win

 

2007 Super Bowl – Indianapolis Colts (-7.5) vs. Chicago Bears

Result: 29-17 Indianapolis Colts SU Win

ATS Result: Indianapolis Colts (-7.5) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

Indy won by 13 vs. Houston

Bears won by 31 vs. 49ers

 

Trend Result: Win

 

2008 Super Bowl – NY Giants vs. NE Patriots (-13.5)

Result: 17-14 NY Giants SU Win

ATS Result: NY Giants (+13.5) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

NYG lost by 11 vs. Dallas

NE won by 46 vs. Bills

 

Trend Result: Win

 

2009 Super Bowl – Pittsburgh Steelers (-7) vs. Arizona Cardinals

Result: 27-23 Pittsburgh Steelers SU Win

ATS Result: Arizona (+7) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

Pitt won by 28 vs. Bengals

Arizona lost by 4 vs. Carolina

 

Trend Result: Win


 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2006
Posts: 282
Posted: #6

2010 Super Bowl – New Orleans Saints vs. Indianapolis Colts (-4.5)

Result: 31-17 New Orleans SU Win

ATS Result: New Orleans (+4.5) ATS Win

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

Saints won by 21 vs. NY Giants

Colts won by 36 vs. Rams

 

Trend Result: Win

 

2011 Super Bowl – GB Packers (-3) vs. Pittsburgh Steelers

Result:????

ATS Result: ?????

After Regular Season Bye Week Results:

GB Won by 28 vs. Minnesota

Pittsburgh won by 18 vs. Cleveland

 

Trend Result:???? If you were to follow this trend the play would be on the Pittsburgh Steelers (+3).

 

I hope you all take something beneficial from this post, as I do not post often but try to when I have time. I am by no means trying to sway any to follow this trend this is just for informational purposes only. I hope you guys can find some good use out of this post. I for one will be on the Pittsburgh Steelers (+3) this Sunday. Good Luck to all whomever you choose. Also I would love to hear your guys’ thoughts on this trend as I spent about 5 hours researching and typing this up and would like to hear your insights.

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2010
Posts: 2524
Posted: #7

RESULTS of all superbowls with a 3 point spread

in years past the 3 point spreads that i have records of 

 

are these 

from 1982 

82 REDSKINS  +3 vs Miami W 27 -17

83 raiders + 3 vs redskins won 38-9

87 REdskins +3 vs Broncos WON 42-10

84 49ers -3  VS Dolphins  WON 38-16

2000 Ravens - 3  vs Giants  WON 34 -7

so as U see the # 3 hasn't made a factor in any superbowl wager

favorites won huge dogs won huge

no teaser on any 3 point losing dog worked

 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2003
Posts: 12648
Posted: #8

Covers Poster #1 :   I like Green Bay, therefore your info makes no sense and I think you're dumb for posting it. Packers baby 

 

Covers Poster #2: I like the Stillers. I like your logic. Steelers in a romp 

 

Covers poster #3: Good info. I like trends and any info I can get. I'm going Pittspuke plus the points even though Big Ben likes girls under the age of 35!!!!   Go Steel City!!!! 

 

Covers Poster #4 :  I hate Rapelisberger . You suck

 

Covers Poster #5: Don Juan said Pittsburgh will cover. He's on a hell of a streak in Super Bowls. Go Steelers!!!

 

Covers Poster #6: I will be watching this system closely

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2006
Posts: 1194
Posted: #9
domenic don't listen to that cash idiot.

I like Pitt for many reasons.  But you have found an angle that may make you money good luck.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2006
Posts: 1194
Posted: #10
Dawnie you are making me think hard on Pitt ML
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2006
Posts: 282
Posted: #11
Thanks VegasPlayer have you heard or seen or any other Super Bowl Trends? I'm still researching looking for angles
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2006
Posts: 282
Posted: #12
Quote Originally Posted by dawniewags:

RESULTS of all superbowls with a 3 point spread

in years past the 3 point spreads that i have records of 

 

are these 

from 1982 

82 REDSKINS  +3 vs Miami W 27 -17

83 raiders + 3 vs redskins won 38-9

87 REdskins +3 vs Broncos WON 42-10

84 49ers -3  VS Dolphins  WON 38-16

2000 Ravens - 3  vs Giants  WON 34 -7

so as U see the # 3 hasn't made a factor in any superbowl wager

favorites won huge dogs won huge

no teaser on any 3 point losing dog worked


Good Stuff Dawnie. Screw the spread its basically a PK when you look at the prior super bowls.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2006
Posts: 1194
Posted: #13
I never look at trends since teams today are different then teams 3 years ago.

One trend that died this year was betting strong Favs after a Bye.
It was a  this year.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2004
Posts: 4774
Posted: #14

Simply ask yourself this question:

"WHICH TEAM IS BEST AT BOTH RUNNING THE FOOTBALL AND STOPPING THE RUN?"

...c'mon... this one is easy gang...

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2007
Posts: 66896
Posted: #15
this thread hurt my head
BEST OF HEALTH, HAPPINESS,WEALTH, BLESSINGS and LUCK TO ALL !!
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2007
Posts: 956
Posted: #16
Quote Originally Posted by rollmaestro:

Simply ask yourself this question:

"WHICH TEAM IS BEST AT BOTH RUNNING THE FOOTBALL AND STOPPING THE RUN?"

...c'mon... this one is easy gang...

Really?  Even though over 50% of Pittsburghs rushes were straight up the middle, and the guy that helped open those holes is OUT for the game?  And Green Bay isn't going to be be worried about running the ball since their strength and the Steelers weakness is in the passing game.  There is no need to factor all that into the equation?  Huh.  I'll be damned.  Thanks for making this so simple for all of us.     

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2006
Posts: 282
Posted: #17
Quote Originally Posted by DoubleUp4Life:

this thread hurt my head

DoubleUp I read a lot of your stuff appreciate everything you do in the college football forum. You don't think this trend is useful?
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2007
Posts: 3727
Posted: #18
Quote Originally Posted by numbersbuster:

Really?  Even though over 50% of Pittsburghs rushes were straight up the middle, and the guy that helped open those holes is OUT for the game?  And Green Bay isn't going to be be worried about running the ball since their strength and the Steelers weakness is in the passing game.  There is no need to factor all that into the equation?  Huh.  I'll be damned.  Thanks for making this so simple for all of us.     


Steelers passing game is their weakness?  You mean defensively where they rank number 1 in giving up the least yards per pass 6.3.....or you mean offensively, where they are a number 2 overall with 3600 yards passing and a ridiculous 8.1 yards per pass average?
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2006
Posts: 282
Posted: #19
Quote Originally Posted by LineKiller28:


Steelers passing game is their weakness?  You mean defensively where they rank number 1 in giving up the least yards per pass 6.3.....or you mean offensively, where they are a number 2 overall with 3600 yards passing and a ridiculous 8.1 yards per pass average?

 LineKiller. I am on Pitt +3 & ML. BOL
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2010
Posts: 377
Posted: #20
I like your logic, good luck with your play.  Unfortunately trends from seasons past maybe a novelty but your seasoned cappers break it down with your old school x's and o's.  BOL
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2004
Posts: 4774
Posted: #21

Ok Numbersbuster, I'd also like to touch on the unfortunate loss of rookie All-Pro C M.Pouncey on Pittsburgh's O-line; while his absence might scare some into thinking that the Steelers just won't be able to protect Big Ben adequately enough for him to make his throws/reads in a timely manner, just know that Legursky has had 2 weeks to review the playbook & snap-counts etc, so I am not worried about the C-to-QB exchange at all; Legursky is himself a professional too and would likely be starting for many NFL teams. Moreover, Pouncey's loss will more or less force Pittsburgh to do what they do best historically --- RUN the FOOTBALL. Considering Green Bay's woeful stat of allowing 4.7 yards per carry this season, I don't see why Pittsburgh won't take FULL advantage of the Packers' deficiency in this area --- which also opens up play-action pass downfield to speedster Wallace should Green bay become complacent, expecting the run on so-called "running" downs... As good a D-Coordinater as Capers is, he won't be on the field trying to slow down/tackle the brute that is Rashard Mendenhall, a downhill runner who has since come of age and into his own since the Steelers' last SB victory sgainst AZ, a team that was most proficient vs the run in fact. In a nutshell, Pouncey's loss may very well be Legursky's gain and a blessing in disguise, as he won't be asked to pass-block for even a majority of Pittsburgh's offensive plays, he will instead be asked to RUN-BLOCK, and this should keep him fresh along with the rest of PITT's admittedly short-handed O-line.

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2006
Posts: 282
Posted: #22
I think people need to get over the fact Pouncey is out, he is a really good young center but Legursky will be fine. People need to stop magnifying these injuries because they don't do it when they are capping there regular season selections so don't do it now.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2004
Posts: 4774
Posted: #23
I agree Dom, and I was merely responding to our friend NumbersBuster, who claimed that my "nut-shelled" analysis, while brief, was too simplistic; well, it IS grounded in theory, not merely just another cliche... And I'm with you on Legursky --- the guy had ONE bad exchange with Big Ben and now he is being made out to be completely inferior to a ROOKIE center lol... Pouncey is great, and the Center is important of course, but I, like you, believe folks are making too much of the negative aspects of Legursky's presence in the lineup...
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2006
Posts: 282
Posted: #24
Quote Originally Posted by rollmaestro:

I agree Dom, and I was merely responding to our friend NumbersBuster, who claimed that my "nut-shelled" analysis, while brief, was too simplistic; well, it IS grounded in theory, not merely just another cliche... And I'm with you on Legursky --- the guy had ONE bad exchange with Big Ben and now he is being made out to be completely inferior to a ROOKIE center lol... Pouncey is great, and the Center is important of course, but I, like you, believe folks are making too much of the negative aspects of Legursky's presence in the lineup...

This happens with the Super Bowl every year. The game is so magnified and covered by so many media outlets people drive themselves crazy with all the bullshit they are being fed by the media. The media is just trying create a story as always its there jobs. 
 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 7850
Posted: #25
Quote Originally Posted by DoubleUp4Life:

this thread hurt my head


maybe it could use a bit more color
All Forums | NFL Betting
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.