Vegas Odds for Riders to win Cups

According to via Calgary Herald,

[url=] ... story.html[/url]

the odds of each CFL team winning the Grey Cup is

3 to 1 Calgary
4.5 to 1 B.C.
6 to 1 Edmonton
7.5 to 1 Montreal
9 to 1 Hamilton
10 to 1 Toronto
12 to 1 Saskatchewan
15 to 1 Winnipeg

Take it for what you want. But it is kinda mind boggling that we're virtually at the bottom. Even on paper, we have a pretty darn good football team if you ask me. There is no reason we should not be Cup contenders as of right now. I like the "no respect" mantra the Riders get year after year. So I kinda personally like it.

Do you agree with these rankings in the CFL overall? Why or Why not? Just trying to get some football discussion going in this dreadfully long off-season.

There's a common misconception that a sportsbook's odds are an estimate of the actual likelihood of a team actually achieving whatever accomplishment the odds relate to. That's not it at all. What the odds try and do is balance the beting, so that the house's net result is more or less the same regardless of who wins.

It's much easier to explain in the point spread situation, but it also applies to league-wide odds.

Maybe a little surprised by BC , both Sask and Winnipeg are right were odds makers would put 2 teams with such little proven talent at the QB position.

Personally i think we should be right around 7.5 to 1.

I'm surprised both Hamilton and Toronto are ahead of us. I would say the Riders should be at par with Edmonton at 6 to 1.

Everything you say is true!

I started this to see more where others think the Riders should be, and if they believe other teams should be relative to the Riders, that is, your predictions/opinions as of right now how the standings might look at the end of October.

BC has no QB, and as of today, their RB is Ian Smart.
Anton is good, but he's not good enough to fill all the holes that BC has suffered this year. Will Geroy and Paris be as effective with O'Neil Wilson trying to fill Cleremont's shoes -- with no Stefan Logan or Charles Roberts?

Hamilton is a puzzler. I'd have to put them one step down from Toronto.

I'd put
Calgary 5 to 1
Edmonton 7 to 1
Montreal 7 to 1
Sask 10 to 1
BC 10 to 1
Toronto 12 to 1
Hamilton 13 to 1 ( lucky number 13 )
Winnipeg 13 to 1

yep. The bookies are trying to reflect more than just how good a team is. The actual betting will of course change the odds. But they do somewhat try to reflect the "odds" as they see them when first released.
That said, if you agree that Calgary is number one, and solidly so, followed by BC and Edmonton, why would anyone then expect the Riders to have good odds? You need to make the play=offs to win the Grey Cup. Even if you believe the Riders are a good team, if they finish 4th in the West, they may not make the play-offs. Meanwhile, in the East, the odds of any team there making the play-offs are pretty good---especially if the consensus is Winnipeg will suck with Lefors at QB. Therefore the odds are not just a reflection of how good the teams are, but of the odds they will make the play-offs. And right now, going with Durant, in a strong West conference, the Riders may not. Suddenly, both TO and Hamilton being better odds to win the Grey Cup makes sense, does it not?
Eg: These are NOT my predictions, just what might happen based on the Vegas odds. The Riders in this example are one game out of second in the West, tied for the 4th best record in the league, but miss the play=offs.
Cal-12-6 Mon 10-8
BC-10-8 Ham 9-9
Edm-9-9 TO 9-9
Sask-9-9 Winn 4-14

I like how Hamilton has better odds than us :lol:

i would tweek those odds just a bit… almost agreeing with zbest but his numbers barely favor anyone!

cal 3-1
mon 4.5-1
ed 6-1
bc 7-1
sask 8.5-1
tor 9-1
ham 9.5-1
win 11-1

but hll what do i know?? i’ve been outa the country for 2 months (sans technology) and some of what has been said in this thread is even news to me!
… god this feels like an extra-long offseason

I laugh at how they have Edmonton sitting at 6-1. please!!

it's pretty obvious that they know Squat about the CFL!

B.C. lost a bunch of players yet they don't feel any effects.

we lose a couple defenders and suddenly we are 12-1??

like talk about complete Bull****

It's also odd that they can rank Toronto ahead of anyone at this point. Weak receiving corps, lack of a running game, key personnel losses (Dorsey, Parker), no backup QB talent, extremely green coaching staff........


...Obviously, these guys, setting the 'odds' ,are about as informed about the CFL , as Bettman of the nhl....not very....There'll be some serious money changing hands when the real numbers come in....T.Os'. position is the biggest laugh...they have so many holes ..they'll be very hard-pressed to find the win column at all in 09 :lol: :lol:

Folks, Vegas loves people like you.

The reason Toronto's odds seem lower than they should be is not because the books know nothing about the CFL, or that they think Toronto is better than you do. It is because, relatively speaking, they are expecting to get more pro-Toronto bets than pro-other team best, hence the odds go down.

I'll say it again, the odds are NOT a measure by the books of how likely it is a team will win the Grey Cup. It is their estimate of the point at which their return based on bets placed, will be about the same regardless of who wins. That's why the odds change as bets are placed - one team doesn't magically become better, the books are adjusting the odds to prompt more bets the opposite way, or conversely, to reflect a higher number of bets flowing in one direction.

If you got 1,000 people to each bet $100 on Winnipeg on the same day, you can bet that Winnipeg's odds by day's end won't be the same. Heck, given how thinly the CFL is wagered, that might be enough to make Winnipeg the pre-season favourite, in terms of odds. It's the wagers that changed the odds, the book didn't suddenly fall in love with Stephan LeFors.

...You're right-on Arte...about the wagers changing odds...IT's just the perception that it leaves everyone....IF you look at it from your point of makes sense....that's how Vegas runs....maximize the houses' take...HOWEVER I like to look at as as the teams 'rating' for the year ..purely from 1 to 8 ( no science or Vegas analogy )....Just ...who's in first....who's in last....The people in Vegas probably don't know Ricky Ray from the Dali Llama....that's just how they work....AND by the way they won't be making any dough from me in Vegas.....I have to quit 'betting' as my resources have thinned enormously... something to do with the economic slow down... :lol: :lol:

It's a common perception, but a wrong one.

You notice it in the NFL from time to time on heavily-bet teams, like the Cowboys - they're often bigger favourites (or smaller underdogs) than their relative ability would dictate, largely because Dallas has a massive number of fans who "bet the 'Boys", regardless of the spread. Often the professional gambling money evens this out quickly by taking the bargain on the other side, but if you are a serious gambler, and pay attention, there are some opportunites you can squeeze an extra half-point or even a whole point out of the spread by timing your bets on oppoenents of teams bet heavily by recreational bettors. It's harder in the NFL as there is so much pro money wagered, and books will build in the anticipated pro money wager on the other side, so if you're not in regular contact with a book, that window can open and shut very quickly, but in peripheral sports, it is sometimes even more pronounced, and will exist for a longer period of time.

According to the leader-post rider rumblings blog the Riders vegas odds have now dropped to 15-1 (tied with Hamilton). This has no affect on me because Americans know nothing about the CFL and therefore should not make opinions towards it. Either way the riders only lost a few players and managed to sign a few good ones in their absence (i.e. Clermont!). We were 12-6 last season so what is stopping us from doing it again or finishing better? BC has lost a lot of key players (i.e. Wake, Logan, Williams, etc.). That will hurt much more than losing Llyod and Mckenzie. Edmonton has a weak receiving core and their LBs are unproven besides Llyod. Their defensive backfield isn't much better either. Calgary will definitely be solid on offence and their defence could be good as well. In the East, Monteal will surely dominate. Hamilton could sneak in the playoffs if Glenn or Porter play well this year. Their defence might have some holes though so it will be tough for them to go far. Toronto is straight up terrible! They have literally no CFL experience withing their coaching staff. This will hurt bad. Winnipeg has no legitimate starting QB. Their D is experienced but as we all know a good defence can only take a team so far.
As I see it, the only teams that could finish above Sask are Calgary and Montreal. Whoever makes the Vegas odds should take another look or they could be losing some serious money.

Calgary -- 2.6-to-1 ( 3 )
B.C. -- 4.5
Edmonton -- 7 ( 6 )
Montreal -- 7.5
Hamilton -- 9
Toronto -- 10
Saskatchewan -- 15 ( 12 )
Winnipeg -- 15

Calgary is fetching more money than expected, while Edmonton and Sask aren't getting the money they thought.
Surprised that Sask's line moved in that direction. I figured with a 12:1 line, a stack of people would be betting on them. At 15-to-1, I almost want to throw $20 at them. $300 would make for a nice victory party.

Who really cares?

Everybody thinks there team is better than the odds give them. Most people aren't right.

Last year, the Argos were 3-to-1 odds to win the Grey Cup. Lots of experienced coaching and supposed high-calibre players. How did that work out again?

It'll be proven on the FIELD, not at a betting window.

Although if you were betting, Montreal's an absolute steal right now at 7.5....Hard to take issue with much of the rest. I'd want a little more on Edmonton given their division and off-season changes....a solid 8, if I could find a book that would haggle. Maybe another couple ticks on Hamilton too, but everyone in the East will pay a little lower due to the weakness of the division.