Browns vs. Jaguars Odds
| Browns Odds | -1.5 |
| JaguarsOdds | +1.5 |
| Over/Under | 37.5 |
| Date | Friday, Aug. 12 |
| Time | 7:15 p.m. ET |
*Odds as of Friday morning
NFL preseason odds are heavily influenced by player news.
Because coaches have their own agendas regarding their starters, teams choose to approach matchups differently.
For example, veteran teams that have remained largely intact likely need less playing time in the preseason to knock off the rust.
On the other hand, young teams or those with new head coaches may look at the preseason as an important time to get in meaningful reps and learn together ahead of the regular season.
From a betting market perspective, this has a significant impact on NFL spreads and over/unders.
For example, both the Browns and Jaguars are expected to play their offensive starters for at least a portion of Friday night's preseason game, and the latest over/under reflects that.
At 37.5, the Browns vs. Jaguars total is currently the largest of all preseason Week 1 matchups, but what does this mean from a betting value standpoint?
Is the over the savvy play considering that both starting quarterbacks will see some time? Or is this number so large that it's worth buying the under?
Using our Bet Labs software, a 57.2% NFL betting trend with a 604-game sample size can point us in the right direction.
Browns vs. Jaguars Betting Trend
According to our NFL betting data, when a preseason total reaches 37 points, it's time to consider playing the under.
Since the start of the 2004 NFL preseason, unders are 339-254-11 (57.2%) in games that close with totals of at least 37 points.
In fact, this trend has not had a losing preseason since 2013, when games fitting this criteria finished 19-25-1.
Please note that there are no guarantees in sports betting and even a bet that has won 57.2% of the time over a large sample still loses nearly 43% of the time as well, and who knows what will happen in a one-game sample.
However, this trend does show that large NFL preseason totals tend to be overvalued historically.
