I don't get it. So Vegas knows more than we do because the Hawks are favored by 17.5 but they didn't know that much when Nebraska was favored by essentially the same amount? Not following the logic here
You have found the error in my logic. Or exposed that there is no logic in my post. Well done, the eating of crow begins now. I'll try to explain best I can...so bare with me.
The job that the Vegas odds-makers have is to not neccessarily predict
winners, it's to keep the money coming in on both sides of the line
within 5% of one another. So, they throw out lines that make gamblers across the country think they are crazy, or think they are locks. Going back to the 19.5 line for Nebraska over ISU. That line was based on the recent play of ISU - and their injuries, and how angry Nebby was going to be after getting stonewalled by Texas Tech on their home turf, more people jumped all over that line thinking Nebraska was a lock. Point being, it looked like a lock - but it wasn't.
The simplest thing I can say, is bet the opposite of what you think. When it looks like a lock, it's probably not. When it's a head-scratcher of a line, it's more times than not, a good bet.
Iowa over UNI at what...-16 1/2? looked like a lock, it wasn't.
Then, most doubted that Iowa should be the favorite over Iowa State at -7 or -7 1/2, we know how that turned out.
The Arizona game was maybe a line that I would've stayed away from, as was this past weekend's MSU line.
Penn State was "only a 5 1/2 point favorite" over Iowa, that was a good bet on Iowa.
On a semi-related note, the majority of bettors (both of the $5 per game and 5-large per game) are looking at that 17.5 line and thinking Vegas is crazy. "No way can Iowa can hang 17.5 on Indiana", "Indiana has been putting up big points in their games", "Indiana will be fired up after letting the Northwestern game get away", "Iowa will be too banged up".
This line has me feeling that is has all the makings to be a good bet for the Hawks.