Super Bowl Prop Bets

There is never any shortage of hard-earned cabbage riding on the outcome of the Super Bowl. The Vegas sports books do crazy business with people from all over betting on which team will win the game and by how much, as do various local sports books, not to mention the average group of friends wagering amongst themselves.

But one of the funnest aspects of Super Bowl gambling is the prop bets.

If you're not familiar, prop bets are just wagers that really have nothing to do with the outcome of the game. They can be bets on anything, like who will win the coin toss before the game starts. These prop bets are, however, legitimate bets, supported by the Vegas sports books.

Here are some of the prop bets that grabbed my attention:

Game MVP: (Okay, this ones not so crazy) Tom Brady is a 1 to 2 favorite to win the MVP. $200 to win $100. Eli Manning is second at 7 to 2. Quarterbacks have won the award 21 times, but just twice in the past five years. Giants kicker Lawrence Tynes is 25 to 1. Adalius Thomas is listed at 50 to 1.

Player to score first TD: According to Vegas, Randy Moss is the favorite to score the first TD at 9 to 2. Next are Patriots running back Laurence Maroney and wide receiver Wes Welker at 7 to 1. Burress is next at 8 to 1. Giants fullback Madison Hedgecock is getting 40 to 1 odds.

Kobe Bryant: Yes, you can incorporate Kobe Bryant into your Super Bowl gambling. The Lakers play the Washington Wizards on Super Bowl Sunday, and one bet asks who will score more -- Bryant or the Patriots? Bryant's averaging just under 28 points per game while the Patriots averaged just under 37 points per game during the regular season. New England has scored 31 and 21 in two playoff games. There are others also: Welker receptions vs. Bryant free throws made; Jacobs rushing attempts vs. Bryant first-half points; Brady completions vs. Bryant field-goal attempts; Brady touchdown passes vs. Bryant three-pointers made.

Other sports: Maybe you're not an NBA fan. There are other cross-sport wagers to be made. North Carolina plays Florida State Sunday in college hoops. Who will score more points -- the Tar Heels' Wayne Ellington (averaging just under 17 per game) or the Giants? Golf enthusiasts? How about Tiger Woods' fourth-round birdies against Moss receptions? Soccer lovers -- Giants+Patriots interceptions vs. Newcastle+Middlesbrough goals. Even the NHL gets some love -- Jaromir Jagr shots on goal vs. Total QB sacks by both teams.

Sibling rivalry: Who will have the most passing yardage, Eli Manning in this year's Super Bowl or brother Peyton in last year's? Peyton had 247 passing yards last year. In either case, you have to give 11 1/2 to 10 odds (meaning you have to wager 11.50 bones to win 10 bones or 115 bones to win 100).

Superman vs. Bizarro Superman: Tom Brady in this year's Super Bowl vs. Tom Brady in the Super Bowl four years ago against Carolina. Brady threw three TDs against the Panthers in 2004. Whether you pick the younger or older Brady, you have to lay 6-to-5, or 120 to win 100. It gets more complicated if you want to bet today's Brady against the real young Brady in the Super Bowl against St. Louis, where he threw just one TD pass. In that case, if you want the current-day Brady, you start out with minus-2 TD passes and lay the 120 to win 100.

Cops vs. Mischief-makers: Will an NFL player get arrested in Phoenix during the week of the Super Bowl (no mention of whether he has to be from a participating team or whether only felonies count). It's a Yes or No bet, minus-120 either way.

Old arrogant guy vs. young arrogant guy: Will Don Shula be on the field to shake Bill Belichick's hand after the game? Yes, plus-150, No minus-200.

Joe Buck vs. your last nerve: How many times will announcer Joe Buck say Peyton (not Eli) Manning's name during the broadcast. The over-under is 5 1/2 and it's minus-125 for the over and minus-115 for the under.


Odds may change after press time.

The UFO Beat Goes ON

Well, I've been out of the loop for a couple of days. I was at The Amazing Meeting 5.5 conference in Florida over the weekend, sponsored by the James Randi Educational Foundation, and drank so much whiskey at the conference parties, it took me until today to be able to form complete sentences again.

But my typing fingers seem to be working again, so let's get back to some alien space craft ridiculousness, shall we?

While I was gone, a new twist in the Texas UFO story surfaced. Seems the air force recanted its earlier denial of having fighter jets in the area where locals reported a UFO, and admitted that they did indeed have a some planes in the air at the time.

From what I gather, it looks as though this change in their story is either in response to the overwhelming hype surrounding the incident that exploded in Stephenville back on January 8, or it's simply a matter of the air force spokespeople involved not having clearance to report the fighter activity when initially asked. Or it could very well be a combination of the two.

However, if the military's admission was meant solely to put an end to the hullabaloo, they didn't think it through very well. I sat across the aisle from some fellow Texans on the plane ride home from Florida who were very vocal that the reversal by the air force was proof that the government is covering something up.

Covering something up? The government?!?!

It amazes me how many of the same people who rail against the government for its incompetence, have the temerity to think it can nonetheless cover up something like alien visitation.

"Oh, the government can't balance the budget, conduct a proper humanitarian effort in New Orleans, or stop desperate people from crossing its borders, but it can hide a race of beings that possess the intelligence and technology to cross lights years of space to visit us."

Sheesh!

On the other side of things, knowing what we know about how the various government agencies work, especially in post-9/11 America and in a time of war, it seems more plausible to assume the military officials who were initially asked about the sighting were simply not in a position to offer information at that time. The default position is most likely "no military activity" until they are cleared to say, "Yes there was military activity. What the folks of Stephenville saw were such and such aircraft practicing such and such maneuvers".

Incidentally, while in Florida, I happened to catch Larry King Live show discussion about the Stephenville sightings. Michael Shermer of the Skeptic Society fame was the voice of reason on the panel, and he did a solid job of presenting the rational side like he always does. My friend, Phil Plait, The Bad Astronomer, was asked to be on the panel, but was coincidentally at the same conference I was attending, and therefor was unable to participate.

It didn't matter though, the show went about as expected. Larry is infamous for believing every whacko thing to come down the pike, and he loves to jam pack his panels with mostly creduloids. To his credit, though, he will sometimes invite a good scientists or a good skeptic to join in, though I suspect he has no clue how science and skepticism work. He's never demonstrated that he does.

But there are a couple things I can say for certain after watching that broadcast. Most people abandon critical thinking faster than the speed of sound, and Larry King remains the creepiest thing on TV.

At any rate, if there are any further developments in this story, I'll do my best to keep you posted.