Here’s how much the betting public hates the Seahawks

[seabowl]

With both the Seahawks and the Rams having the same exact record at 8–6, the odds to win the Super Bowl for each of them are a mile apart. Current odds to win the Super Bowl.:

Rams 34-1
Seahawks 90-1

I get it, I would put the Rams ahead of the Seahawks, but by almost triple the amount? That’s just a really strange spread difference.

 

[Fernie Hawks Fan]

Probably based on remaining schedule and the rams having a tie-breaker against Seattle...not far off in my opinion.

 

[Rat]

If this was about divisional odds, I'd agree with you, but this makes sense for SB winning odds. Especially when considering:

-To win the SB, you need to make the playoffs, and the Rams have better odds to get to the playoffs, given they currently lead with the tiebreaker and play the 4-10 Jets this week while we have the 12-2 Vikings a week after getting embarrassed at home on SNF by a team the Vikings beat. The Rams would also likely be favored if week 18 turns into a winner take all thing.

-The Rams have a head coach who has made the SB twice, winning one, and has a 7-4 playoff record. Seattle has a rookie head coach.

-The Rams have an experienced, Super Bowl winning QB. Geno has yet to win a playoff game, has only played in one, and has no experience leading a playoff run.

-That experience also means that the Rams would likely fare better in a hypothetical SB matchup with someone like the Chiefs or Bills. We're not just talking about getting to the SB, but getting there and winning.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Another Meh burger. Rams have a much easier road. They got lucky to win the last 2 games, and were lucky to beat the Hawks (missed xp or the Hawks win)

But like Rat pointed out, look at the QB. Stafford has a ton of experience and is a better QB than Geno. I said what I said

 

[pittpnthrs]

But like Rat pointed out, look at the QB. Stafford has a ton of experience and is a better QB than Geno. I said what I said

Trouble maker.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Guilty

 

[seabowl]

Anyway you look at it with only three games to go and two teams tied for their division lead, one team at 34-1 and the other team at 90-1 is a big damn discrepancy and no way justified for that large of a difference.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

No doubt. At least we're in the mix. In a season where we were expected to be average at best.

 

[HomerJHawk]

Super Bowl? Holy s**t.
The real odds are zilch.

Let's talk gettin us better for next year.

 

[kidhawk]

Anyone know what our Super Bowl odds were before the season compared to now?

 

[Rat]

Anyway you look at it with only three games to go and two teams tied for their division lead, one team at 34-1 and the other team at 90-1 is a big damn discrepancy and no way justified for that large of a difference.

It's plenty justified.

The Rams are 7-2 in their last nine games, with a win at Seattle among them. They also beat the 12-2 Vikings and 11-3 Bills.

The Seahawks are 5-4 in that same stretch with zero of those wins coming against teams that currently have a winning record and they got blown out by the two best teams they faced, including a home humiliation just five days ago at the hands of the Packers.

The Rams also have a SB winning coach and QB.

I don't get how it's surprising that people would give them a considerably better chance of making the playoffs (given their easier finishing schedule and better recent play), beating three good teams in a row in the playoffs, and then winning the SB against a likely favored AFC opponent.

 

[JayhawkMike]

With both the Seahawks and the Rams having the same exact record at 8–6, the odds to win the Super Bowl for each of them are a mile apart. Current odds to win the Super Bowl.:

Rams 34-1
Seahawks 90-1

I get it, I would put the Rams ahead of the Seahawks, but by almost triple the amount? That’s just a really strange spread difference.

My feelings as a fan and my decisions as a gambler are almost completely disconnected with each other. So no “hate“. Reason, research, common sense etc yes.

 

[jman316]

If you pay attention, you’ll never see a Seahawk player highlight in betting ads.
Odds also seem fishy…

Conspiracy?

Nope, I think it has something to do with the online betting restrictions in Washington state.

It’s all about the money and there’s not as much revenue coming from WA.

 

[seabowl]

If you pay attention, you’ll never see a Seahawk player highlight in betting ads.
Odds also seem fishy…

Conspiracy?

Nope, I think it has something to do with the online betting restrictions in Washington state.

It’s all about the money and there’s not as much revenue coming from WA.

Very interesting take

 

[flv2]

Super Bowl winning chances: Rams 3%, Seahawks 1%. According to 1 site the Rams have a 59% chance of making the playoffs whilst the Seahawks have a 30% chance. Combine that with current form and the odds are correct in relation to each other.

 

[Chuckwow]

Another factor, and this a big one, there are many more people in LA than in Seattle. And many more people go to Vegas from LA than from Seattle. Vegas couldn't care less which team is better. They only care who's betting what and on whom. If twice as many people wager on the Rams, Vegas needs to also attract betting attention on Seattle. They'll make Seattle's odds more attractive and LA's odds less so. SeaBowl is exactly right, the betting public does not believe we stand much of a chance. It's hard to argue that.