I went 1-1 last week, winning with the Chiefs and losing with the Packers. I didn’t feel strongly about either game – I could just as easily gone with any of the four combinations, so the result doesn’t mean much to me.
Super Bowl 55
Buccaneers +3 at Chiefs
The better defense typically outperforms against the spread in Super Bowls. I delved into this last year and bet (heavily) on the 49ers as a result. You can laugh now, but it was 20-10 49ers with 10 minutes left in the game before the wheels came off. That doesn’t mean I got to keep the money I wagered, but it also didn’t feel as though the thesis were falsified, either. Accordingly, when two teams meet in the Super Bowl, my general lean (against the spread at least) is still to take the one with the decidedly better defense.
If the Chiefs crush the Bucs, I might have to make an Andy Reid-with-two-weeks/Patrick Mahomes exception. In that case, the thesis might be – in general the top defense in the game is underpriced, but when the other offense is otherworldly great, ignore the general rule. Except it’s unclear why there would be a special exception for the Chiefs and not the highest scoring team in NFL history, the 2013 Broncos, who got destroyed by the Seahawks, or the 2007 Patriots who got crushed (ATS) by the Giants. In some ways, Tom Brady‘s Buccaneers are the closest analog to the