So early betting lines are available for 7 UT games

[Clockwork Orange]

http://www.rockytoptalk.com/2013/6/7/4406436/tennessee-volunteers-betting-lines

Four of them seem really reasonable to me: dogs to Bammer by 27, Florida by 12, and Georgia by 11; Vandy a virtual tossup with UT favored by 1. I think all four of these are reasonable, though by November I hope we are a TD better than Vandy.

The other three seem suspect: Oregon over UT by 25, UT over Auburn by 8, UT over Kentucky by 7.5.

* Oregon by 25, Alabama by 27? Both of those are on the road, so are they really saying that Oregon is almost as good as Alabama? Or are they saying that playing @ Autzen is that much more of a HFA than playing @ Bryant-Denny? I don't buy either of those things. For that matter I don't see playing @ Autzen as nearly two TDs more difficult than playing @ the Swamp. It seems to me like the oddsmakers are either overvaluing Autzen and the travel west or overvaluing Oregon under a new head coach. Perhaps they overvalue both.

* UT over Auburn by 8, UT over Vandy by 1? Both of these are at home and Vandy follows a bye week for UT. Do they really see Vandy as a TD more difficult than Auburn? I think this is crazy. I know Auburn struggled last year but that team has talent . . . more talent than Vandy for sure. I expected to find UT-Auburn a tossup.

* UT over Kentucky by 7.5? I know this one's on the road but Kentucky went 2-10 last year, has far less talent than Auburn and UT, and is undergoing a coaching change just like those two schools. How are we not a 2 TD favorite in this one if we're an 8 point favorite vs. Auburn?

The remaining games with no early lines are vs. Peay, WKU, South Alabama, and South Carolina, and @ Mizzou. We'll be favored in three of those, probably be 10+ point dogs to SC, and Mizzou may be a tossup. So it appears to me that the early lines predict UT to go anywhere from 5-7 to 7-5, depending on the Vandy and Mizzou games. Seems reasonable, though I think there's a decent chance of a loss to Auburn and a decent chance of a win against either UGA or SC at home.

[Volznut]

Oregon I can see. They score in bunches and can easily beat us by 25.

Bama....I don't know about 27, seems high

Auburn was awful on offense last year.

[Clockwork Orange]

Oregon I can see. They score in bunches and can easily beat us by 25.

Bama....I don't know about 27, seems high

Auburn was awful on offense last year.

Well there's one angle on this that I didn't talk about but factors in your Oregon comments. Alabama may be far more certain than Oregon to beat UT and simultaneously have a lower spread. To me that's the only reasonable explanation, because Oregon is almost certainly not as good as Alabama. I don't think they're in the same zip code. But the story may be that an Oregon blowout of UT may be the most likely outcome in that game even if they also have a better chance of getting upset by UT or pushed for two quarters, simply by virtue of their potentially explosive offense. Meanwhile, the most likely outcome in the Alabama game may be that they hold UT to less than 10 points and shut things down after 2.5 quarters, winning by 20-25 with the game never in doubt.

In other words the expected spread in the Oregon game may be higher but with much greater variance.

As for Auburn's offense, sure . . . but they did hire an offensive guru as head coach. They'll be better and their talent level is significantly better than they looked last year.

[Volznut]

Well there's one angle on this that I didn't talk about but factors in your Oregon comments. Alabama may be far more certain than Oregon to beat UT and simultaneously have a lower spread. To me that's the only reasonable explanation, because Oregon is almost certainly not as good as Alabama. I don't think they're in the same zip code. But the story may be that an Oregon blowout of UT may be the most likely outcome in that game even if they also have a better chance of getting upset by UT or pushed for two quarters, simply by virtue of their potentially explosive offense. Meanwhile, the most likely outcome in the Alabama game may be that they hold UT to less than 10 points and shut things down after 2.5 quarters, winning by 20-25 with the game never in doubt.

In other words the expected spread in the Oregon game may be higher but with much greater variance.

As for Auburn's offense, sure . . . but they did hire an offensive guru as head coach. They'll be better and their talent level is significantly better than they looked last year.

That offensive guru looked really good with Cam Newton, but Auburn doesn't really have a ton of talent at QB. We'll see, but I think we beat Auburn.

[Clockwork Orange]

That offensive guru looked really good with Cam Newton, but Auburn doesn't really have a ton of talent at QB. We'll see, but I think we beat Auburn.

I think so too. But I don't think it's that much more likely than beating Vandy. Not enough to justify an 8 point spread.

[BanditVol]

I don't think betting lines are ever "reasonable" per se.  They are not designed to be accurate but to get people to bet both sides evenly.  I agree with your stab at the Oregon game....bettors will look at their explosive offense and how bad we were on D last year and bet it that way, IMO.

@Nut....yes Malzhan had C Newton.  In 2010.  People forget that he took an offense that in 2008 was every bit as inept as ours (I still shudder at that game we played them that year....that has to be the UGLIEST game I have ever attended in person, and perhaps even watched...it was that bad) and turned it around in 2009 with basically the same players.  They went from bottom ten in the NCAA to around 30th almost overnight. I was almost more impressed by that than what he did with Cam.

As for that....I think Cam was actually just as fortunate to have Malzahn.  I don't think they win it all without both those guys.  I'm pretty sure that Auburn will have a good offense this fall, or at any rate a much improved one.

I still think we beat them (OC glasses).