Skip to content

Seattle-Green Bay call caused huge swing in Vegas

MACAU-CHINA-US-BUSINESS-GAMING-COMPANY-SANDS Getty Images

There’s a large group of people even more upset about last night’s game-changing call than Packers fans.

For America’s gamblers, it was the difference in a huge score.

According to Darren Rovell of ESPN.com, estimates within the sports book industry had between $150 million and $250 million going the other direction with the Seahawks’ 14-12 win.

The Packers were 3 1/2 point favorites, and would have covered the spread if it was ruled an interception.

“Most of the customers in the sports book were not happy with the final call,” said John Avello, director of the race and sports book at the Wynn in Las Vegas. “The shift was 100 percent. After the [Seahawks] score, all bets were reversed.”

Jeff Sherman, assistant director of the race and sports book at the Las Vegas Hotel, told Rovell he estimated that the call shifted $15 million in Nevada alone, and 10 times that amount worldwide.

The online community skewed higher, with Mike Perry, spokesman for Sportsbook.ag, putting the figure between $200 million and $250 million.

Perry said 70 to 80 percent of the money on his site was put on the Packers, which is in line with the percentage bet in Vegas. At Mandalay Bay, about 85 percent of the money was on Green Bay.

So if you think Mike McCarthy is sore this morning, imagine if you went to sleep thinking you covered.

Permalink 45 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Green Bay Packers, Home, Rumor Mill, Seattle Seahawks
45 Responses to “Seattle-Green Bay call caused huge swing in Vegas”
  1. ridingwithnohandlebars says: Sep 25, 2012 9:52 AM

    Don’t know how anybody could bet on these games with any confidence.

  2. iluvbears says: Sep 25, 2012 9:56 AM

    That’s why they call it “gambling.”

  3. bluebongzilla says: Sep 25, 2012 9:59 AM

    This makes 11 of the last 13 entries about one call in a week 3 game.

  4. raidermot says: Sep 25, 2012 10:02 AM

    I thought point spreads are used to get half the bettors to bet on one team, the other half on the second team. When that happens, the bookie does not care who wins. He gives the looser’s money to the winners and keeps a 10% commission of the loosing bets for himself.

    The old saying goes: The one person in sports betting that does not gamble is the bookie.

    Any odds make that sets the line such that 80% is bet on one team deserves to take a bath every now and then.

  5. sonoco says: Sep 25, 2012 10:03 AM

    Without NFL caliber referees this isn’t really the NFL. If that happened to my team last night I’d be ready to riot.

  6. gtodriver says: Sep 25, 2012 10:05 AM

    Anyone that bets money on sports deserves to lose it.

  7. phinatic1 says: Sep 25, 2012 10:06 AM

    Injustice it’s like watching professional wrestling Fake nfl lost a lot of respect last night

  8. flik44 says: Sep 25, 2012 10:08 AM

    Wonder how much that ref that signaled TD gets out of that Vegas swing?

  9. yelix says: Sep 25, 2012 10:09 AM

    Who cares what gamblers think? I’m concerned about the integrity of the game.

  10. joetoronto says: Sep 25, 2012 10:11 AM

    yelix says:
    Sep 25, 2012 10:09 AM
    Who cares what gamblers think? I’m concerned about the integrity of the game.
    ***************************************************
    This could very well be the dumbest comment of all time.

  11. kleppnasty says: Sep 25, 2012 10:13 AM

    Two things:
    1st, who would have gone to sleep thinking GB covered? GB was losing the entire game until about a minute left, if you go to bed with a minute left covering by 1 pt, then you deserve the rude awakening.
    2nd, as someone pointed out, what a bad point spread. Vegas (online, etc) is supposed to not be gambling. They’re supposed to set a line that gets 50/50 split and they make their money off the 9%. To have a line that caused an 80/20 split means that Vegas was risking a lot of their own money on this game. How did the lines not move?

  12. rayburns says: Sep 25, 2012 10:14 AM

    Imagine the reaction if they find out any of the replacement officials have some sort of connection to gambling…

    And don’t think it can’t happen… if the NFL missed an official having pictures of himself dressed in Saints gear that was posted on his Facebook page, do you think someone with gambling connections couldn’t slip by what is apparently a less than rigorous vetting process??

    I’m not saying that the refs are on the take, but with this big a swing in Vegas, the question has to be asked…

  13. garryjercia says: Sep 25, 2012 10:18 AM

    Personally, I cannot wait for the story reporting how one of the officials was tied to gambling either through an actual wager or some nefarious influence like organized crime.

    If that wont force the NFL’s hand here, nothing will

  14. bubbamonkey100 says: Sep 25, 2012 10:23 AM

    Who cares what gamblers think? I’m concerned about the integrity of the game.

    Without gamblers there would be no pro game PERIOD.

    How can you speak of the integrity of the game without knowing its history?

  15. muskyhunter2542 says: Sep 25, 2012 10:23 AM

    That ref better be careful

  16. primetime0552 says: Sep 25, 2012 10:24 AM

    I thought point spreads are used to get half the bettors to bet on one team, the other half on the second team. When that happens, the bookie does not care who wins. He gives the looser’s money to the winners and keeps a 10% commission of the loosing bets for himself.

    The old saying goes: The one person in sports betting that does not gamble is the bookie.

    Any odds make that sets the line such that 80% is bet on one team deserves to take a bath every now and then.

    =================================

    Since when did Vegas sportsbooks or other sportsbooks get a commision? That may be the way that bookies work(bookies are also illegal), but Vegas(and other legit sportsbooks) dont have a commission. Say the spread is -110. You bet $110 to win a $100. You win the bet you get the $110 you bet back + the $100 you won. You dont get $189 back because they take 10%.

  17. dalucks says: Sep 25, 2012 10:24 AM

    Wait until we find out the referee was part of the fix? The plot will thicken.

  18. cleverbob says: Sep 25, 2012 10:29 AM

    And this is why there won’t be any appeals process…

  19. swagger52 says: Sep 25, 2012 10:37 AM

    So you think this never happens with Regular Refs? Think Again!

    Several Bills claimed one said “just give it to them” (referring to first down yardage) in the huddle. Television instant replays showed that he was short of first down yardage, but the NFL had discontinued use of instant replay the previous season. This was followed by a questionable pass interference call made in the end zone on what would have been the game’s final play. Bledsoe hit Ben Coates for a touchdown on the final untimed play of the game. In protest, the Bills left the field and let the Patriots kicker Adam Vinateri walk in for a meaningless two-point conversion. Doug Flutie, then the Bills’ quarterback, later quipped “They gave them the game, we figured we might as well give them the extra point.”

    The Regular Refs need term limits. It is exactly the big money in Vegas that has bought them already. Obviously, from the article the Replacement Refs don’t care the impact in Vegas.

    This is really the issue with the Regular Refs. It is the corruption with Gambling and the Unions that Roger is trying to rid.

  20. bspuryear says: Sep 25, 2012 10:38 AM

    My buddy was at the Wynn last night and he said that he will never forget the reaction of the people in there after the call.. He bet on the Packers as did many others that got screwed.. As long as people keep going to the games nothing will change and the refs will still be out there because the NFL is still making millions every week kinda sad…

  21. sippindasyzurp says: Sep 25, 2012 10:47 AM

    So the ref comes out and says after reviewing the play, the call stands…

    What he was really saying was ” After confirming with Nevada and Online Sportsbooks, the call on the field stands!”

    The NFL better be careful because Vince McMahon might try and steal these refs for up coming WWE PPV!

  22. mvp4mer says: Sep 25, 2012 10:47 AM

    Look at the amount of money involved. How tempting would it be for a replacement ref to call the game in a way that changes the outcome. The NFL didn’t even check to find out the one replacement ref was all over Facebook as a Saints fan. Do we really think they have checked for connections to gamblers?

  23. borbinski says: Sep 25, 2012 10:55 AM

    now everyone can understand the feeling of raider fan when we got tucked.

  24. steeelfann says: Sep 25, 2012 11:01 AM

    Seattle had no offense at all.

    Wilson, though greatly hyped by Gruden per usual, threw for a whopping 65 yards outside of his first td pass to Tate (nice pass) and the lying Tate second pass complete with interference as well.

    Truth of the matter was that when Green Bay started running it on Seattle, they were dominating.

    Seattle has Zero offense outside of the beast Lynch.

    Really pathetic when you think about it.

  25. gmsingh says: Sep 25, 2012 11:02 AM

    One thing seems to be lost in the shuffle: the Packers much vaunted offense scored 16 points against the Bears and 12 points against the Seahawks. Sure, they got screwed against by the refs, but shouldn’t we worry first about when they’re going to play like a good team?

  26. kleppnasty says: Sep 25, 2012 11:02 AM

    primetime

    Sorry, you may have gone to Vegas, you just aren’t good at math. You bet $110 to win $100. That is the commission. When everyone bets $110 to win $100, it means everyone is giving up $10 (roughly 9%) to the house. If you bet football, both sides of the spread pay -110. If you bet other sports, you will notice that the spreads do not match up. You will not see a -110 on one team and 90 on the other. You’ll see -110 and 100, which means that Vegas is not risking money as long as they get 50/50. Though in the second case they would be possibly not making money if the -110 wins since they’d just be breaking even. The only risk they have is when a team is a huge underdog (Stanford over USC a few years ago when they were -42 spread). In those cases, betting straight up on the underdog puts Vegas at risk, but since the huge underdogs almost never win, betting on them is usually a big win for Vegas.

  27. maverick5266 says: Sep 25, 2012 11:04 AM

    The NFL as far as wagering is concerned right now is the equivalent of pro wrestling.

    If you want to make some dough, bet the storyline not the moneyline.

    The best bet right now is to stay away from the NFL.

  28. gambleonsports says: Sep 25, 2012 11:06 AM

    Primetime you clearly don’t know much about gambling. First of all -110 isn’t the spread, -3.5 was for the packers. 110 is what you have to bet to win 100, for either side. The bookie pays out 100 for the winning side, while keeping 110 from the losing side. Do you not see the 10% still?

  29. ernie ernie says: Sep 25, 2012 11:09 AM

    Looks like someones little bastard kid doesn’t go to college now. All because some dumb ass ref didn’t know the game of football but was paid anyways.

  30. Gabbo says: Sep 25, 2012 11:10 AM

    This game was one of those public vs sharps. The public is always going take the Packers on a short spread. The sharps and consortiums were on Seattle. There’s a reason that despite 80-85% of the public on one side, the spread wasn’t increasing.

    In the end, the Packers are still to blame for allowing all those sacks. Seattle still had more penalties, more penalty yardage. Packers got more first downs from penalties, so it’s not like the refs were on Seattle’s side. Packers should definitely have taken a safety on purpose rather than punting with 50 seconds left.

    Is this a good way to end the game? No. But sadly, this ending is probably one of the best things that could happen to the NFL. Look at all the free publicity and advertising they get. Count how many times, you read, hear, talk about the NFL today. I also wouldn’t follow the media blindly. They make money with all the controversy. Without watching the replay, listen to the last call by Tirico, even he thought it was simultaneous catch at first. No one is going to say otherwise for fear of getting blackballed in the industry.

  31. gooboy6 says: Sep 25, 2012 11:26 AM

    Most of the customers in the sports book were not happy with the final call,” said John Avello, director of the race and sports book at the Wynn in Las Vegas. “The shift was 100 percent. After the [Seahawks] score, all bets were reversed.”
    ——————————————————

    that statement is incorrect, not all bets were reversed. what if you had teased the Packers or Seahawks with another game/bet ? same result

  32. vegasvinnie says: Sep 25, 2012 11:26 AM

    The only other game I can compare this to took place on November 16, 2008. San Diego was playing at Pittsburgh and was down 11 – 10 with seconds left. The Steelers were a 4 and a half point favorite and had just kicked a FG with 11 seconds left to go ahead. On the ensuing kickoff, SD tries a series of laterals which ends up with Troy Polamalu picking up the ball and scoring a TD as time expired. I’m at the Green Valley Ranch sportsbook and the place explodes because a majority of the bettors in that game took the Steelers and now they suddenly think that they’ve pulled out a miracle cover. Suddenly, there’s a review and the play is overturned, even though it doesn’t directly affect the outcome of the game. Confusion reigns and it’s almost 45 minutes after the game ends before an official announcement is made that the 11 – 10 score stands. Now, all of the Steelers bettors have lost while the few Chargers bettors are suddenly trying to get back tickets that they’d torn up or thrown away.

  33. philsgoodman says: Sep 25, 2012 11:46 AM

    Maybe it’s time to roll with the home team for as long as this thing lasts.

    NFL historical home-field advantage: 57.3%

    2012 home-field advantage: 64.6% (31-17)

    Close, controversial, game-deciding call on SNF: goes in favor of the home team (Baltimore)

    (Not that) close, controversial, game-deciding call on call MNF: goes in favor of the home team (Seattle)

    48 games played is not a big enough sample size to completely confirm this trend, but it has been theorized that a large portion of HFA in pro sports is the result of officials being influenced by crowd noise. I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if these amateur, overwhelmed, rookie replacement refs are much more susceptible than the old pros.

  34. laffers says: Sep 25, 2012 11:51 AM

    Roger
    On behalf of a grateful, world wide gambling industry, thank you $250,000,00 times. Keep up the good work!

  35. joewilliesshnoz says: Sep 25, 2012 12:03 PM

    Gambling is a sickness, and I’m sick that I didn’t bet Seattle last nite !

  36. skinsfanwill says: Sep 25, 2012 12:05 PM

    primetime0552 says: Sep 25, 2012 10:24 AM

    I thought point spreads are used to get half the bettors to bet on one team, the other half on the second team. When that happens, the bookie does not care who wins. He gives the looser’s money to the winners and keeps a 10% commission of the loosing bets for himself.

    The old saying goes: The one person in sports betting that does not gamble is the bookie.

    Any odds make that sets the line such that 80% is bet on one team deserves to take a bath every now and then.

    =================================

    Since when did Vegas sportsbooks or other sportsbooks get a commission? That may be the way that bookies work(bookies are also illegal), but Vegas(and other legit sportsbooks) dont have a commission. Say the spread is -110. You bet $110 to win a $100. You win the bet you get the $110 you bet back + the $100 you won. You dont get $189 back because they take 10%.

    *********************************************
    For every winner there is a loser or two. This is how the commission is collected. We both walk in and bet $1100 to win a $1000. That’s $2200. I lose and you win. I lost $1100 and you won $1000. Where is the the other $100? Now multiply that times several hundred or thousand betters. That’s their commission.

  37. Gabbo says: Sep 25, 2012 12:12 PM

    Phil, you’re correct, it’s too small a sample size. In week 3, home teams were 6-10 on covering the point spread. But anyone who says the refs were on Ravens side isn’t looking at the statistics. The only thing that saved the Pats were all the penalties called on the Ravens. Pats gained 9 first down from just penalties, Ravens 5. Ravens were also called for more penalties and had 60+ penalty yards more as well.

    It’s like last night’s game, selective memory from the last drive has completely skewed the fact that Seahawks still had more penalties and penalty yardage, and less first downs gained from Packers penalties or that Packers TD was in fact aided by a phantom PI.

  38. ninerdynasty says: Sep 25, 2012 12:15 PM

    im wondering.. is the ref that called a TD on that play the same ref that called PI on shields and missed the PI on tate on the TD play? if thats true.. the nfl should look into it.. thats a lot of calls that were messed up by one ref…

  39. bangitfootball says: Sep 25, 2012 12:20 PM

    QUESTION: I thought the line was suppose to spread the action out roughy 50/50 on each team. If too much money lands on one team the line starts moving. How do they books end up with 80% on one team?

  40. aljack88 says: Sep 25, 2012 12:24 PM

    borbinski says:
    Sep 25, 2012 10:55 AM
    now everyone can understand the feeling of raider fan when we got tucked.
    ——————————————————–

    Not as bad as Ben Dreith giving the Raiders the playoff win over the Pats in 76.

  41. droyer85 says: Sep 25, 2012 12:37 PM

    The refs are clearly throwing games all around the league and this isn’t the first one. The media is completely ignoring other calls that have changed the outcome of games over the past 3 weeks. A perfect example of that is 2 touchdowns that the officials robbed the Saints of in a game where they lost by 3 points. And I find it very coincidental that there are 2 teams in the NFL that have a player who was involved in the ALLEGED “bounty program” the Browns and the Saints, and both those teams are the only 0-3 teams in the NFL. Very interesting. I am not a Saints or Browns fan, but I do not trust the NFL and I think something very fishy is going on here to say the least. Idk if the NFL is changing the outcome of games to create more parody in the league or what, but there have been way too many controversial calls in EVERY game around the league that have swung momentum or kept drives alive or in this case blatantly changed the outcome. Somethings going on and the media won’t go anywhere near it. Maybe now they will, but like I said, this is not the first bogus outcome of the year.

  42. jack30043 says: Sep 25, 2012 1:38 PM

    The real season doesn’t start until the real refs are on the field. This reminds me of the year the replacement players started half the games the playoffs were all screwed up that year. We are looking at a potential playoffs where none of the premier teams make it because of these refs.

  43. andyreidsbuffet says: Sep 25, 2012 1:38 PM

    The casino couldn’t care less. In football you have a point spread and a money line. If 80% of the gamblers are betting the Packers, Vegas adjusts the money line. For instance, if the Opening money line is -150 Green Bay(meaning you have to bet 150 to win 100), and then gamblers begin betting heavy on Green Bay the money line might change to -260 or -270. It then swings the other direction for Seattle to maybe +200 or so. Vegas is always covered, they get their % regardless.

  44. chi01town says: Sep 25, 2012 2:04 PM

    IT IS WHAT IT IS… The packers lost the game so move on. If Greenbay was so much better than seattle then why was the game so close all night?

  45. iknowzeroaboutsports says: Sep 25, 2012 3:42 PM

    @borbinski Whatever you think of the Packers-Seahawks officiating, the Pats-Raiders play was accurately called. Cry more.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!