Very familiar. Threads like this are exceptionally popular on fan sites, as opposed to wagering oriented sites where the mathematical aspect is better understood.
Wisconsin, Michigan and North Carolina were all favored by 6 points or more 9 times last season, per the consensus closing line. Contrast to the 2015 Canes, who were favored by 6+ only 4 times. Right now the over/under on the 2016 Canes would be 5 games favored by 6+.
Again, it's not all that complicated. In our best recent season -- 2013 -- we won 9 games while being favored by 6+ in 8 games. Believe it or not, those season win over/unders are not a wild subjective stab, an impression they hey the 2016 Miami Hurricanes seem like a 7.5 team so let's hang that number. Pointspread projections are made of every game, and the associated money lines attached. Those money lines when applied to the appropriate formula spit out the logical season win forecast. In 2013 with a favorable schedule and a relatively high power rating we were projected to be considerable favorite quite often, hence our season win over/under was initially 9.5, although it was bet down to 9 in some spots in late August.
Wisconsin in 2015 didn't do anything remarkable. Their season win over/under (regular season only) opened at 10 despite being a double digit underdog in the opener against Alabama. Some spots were bet down to 9.5 late. North Carolina was 8 while Michigan was 7.5 then bet up to 8 at many joints in the late weeks.
When I first was hired as sportsbook supervisor in 1989 but didn't know much about the applicable math toward those season win totals and future book odds, one of the chief oddsmakers pulled me aside and tutored. It was really an eye opener. His first advice on football was to look at those games in which a team was projected to be favored by a touchdown. Those games, he explained carried roughly -250 win expectancy, or theoretically 5 chances in 7. Once it reaches that level there begins to be some substantial advantage, as opposed to 3 or 4 point spreads. Besides, he said, the games with a touchdown projected spread in preseason are more likely to reach double digits at actual gametime than they were to reverse favoritism at gametime. None of this is linear. The advantage swells upward as the pointspread increases.
BTW, NFL favorites win more dependably than college favorites, so those NFL money lines are higher at the same spread than college favorites. Basketball favorites win more dependably than football chalk so those basketball money line charts are higher than football charts. Regardless, the money line fits very well at each pointspread. Plug and play. If you evaluate hundreds or thousands of results at each spread and in each sport as a block, you'll see that the favorite won the game almost exactly as often as the money line predicted they would. That in itself shoots down the laughably ignorant notion that the pointspread is not a prediction of the outcome, but merely serves to balance the action. I always have to chuckle at geniuses who supply that line. Power ratings and home field provide the spread. The spread points to the money line. The money line provides win likelihood. And a scatter plot of results in relation to the spread reveals normal and logical distribution over time.
The 2016 Canes can certainly win 10 games. But it will require our power rating shooting up a full touchdown or more during the course of the season, like Michigan's did last year. Otherwise we are relying on outliers and upsets and coin flips. Only knuckleheads rely on outliers and upsets and coin flips. That was one of the jolts I received upon joining message boards in the late '90s. I had no idea that despicable cats were so popular, and I had no idea outliers were so prized. In my Las Vegas sportsbook environment sure you hear about outliers but the people touting them have to grasp and announce the 8/1 burden, or 15/1 burden, or 30/1 burden, or whatever. Otherwise they will be laughed of the stage, and rightfully so.
Somehow on message boards, particularly sports message boards, it is popular and accepted to try to deflect a pronouncement via use of an outlier example. One relatively meaningless exception and the poster somehow believes the point has been diffused, that the 90%+ foundation holds no worth. Hilarious. But I've learned to accept it. It goes on everywhere, not merely here. Those posters know there is a market for the high decibel outliers, just like certain political authors know they can lap up SAM sales and SAM acclaim via use of blunt titles like "Outrage" and "Slander."
The ACC Coastal is unusually condensed. That's one of our hurdles toward 10 wins or nearby. The power ratings of every team in that division are within 10 points of each other entering 2016. North Carolina tops the Sagarin numbers at 81 then it drops no lower than 71. You won't find congestion like that in any other conference or division. It's the reason the 2016 Canes can't rely on normalcy...wonderful normalcy...as opposed to outliers and upsets and coin flips. Richt's job -- now and more likely toward future seasons -- is to bump the power rating to the degree that road games like Georgia Tech, Virginia and North Carolina State carry 6+ point theoretical advantage. Those road games against mid level conference teams dot the schedule every season. That's where the extra wins show up, when those games are comfortably taken.
