Of course; but it rarely moves more than a point or two either way. It’s already dropped from 3 to 2.5. Barring some development, I doubt it ever goes below 2. That’s the skill of Vegas – they can predict what the crowd will predict.
ETA – and as Varlos’ post points out, there isn’t one definitive line: dozens of bookmakers come up with lines … and they are all within a point.
As you said, the Superbowl line is, I would guess, harder to move because of (a) volume and (b) breadth of people betting. For the market to correct a line, betting has to be rationally based, and it isn’t. I’d say that effect is magnified on an event like the Superbowl, where a lot of fans will place their only bet of the year.
Also, the market can “correct” a line in the wrong way. Notre Dame, for example, are always good to bet against, because there are so many blind Notre Dame fans backing the team that it distorts the line.
I wonder if that’s not what’s going on here, to an extent. I can easily imagine that there’s a lot of hardcore Packer fans* who are going to bet on the Packers**, regardless of the spread.
** - I’d classify myself as a hardcore Packer fan. I’m simply not interested in gambling. 
I don’t think so, seeing as it opened that way. Though Vegas could have been predicting that, but I would say there are as many diehard Steelers fans doing the same thing.
The Steelers have a much larger fanbase nationally. They and the Cowboys both rank in the top 5 in team-branded merchandise sold pretty much every year.
On the radio they said this is the first Super Bowl line under a field goal in 28 years.
That may be, but how do the Steelers rank in fans willing to bet on them no matter what? 
Yep, looks like it’s also tied for the third lowest Super Line line of all time.
So not only did the Vikings lose every Superbowl they were in, they have failed to cover in all of them. Chokers.
Not to get internet creepy, but which part of SoIll? I’m at SIU.
Aggregate: 34-95 (-61)
Average: 8.50-23.75 (-15.25)
The were +9 in any of the Super Bowls they wouldn’t have covered.
Garrison Keiller had a good joke about the Vikings on last Saturday’s edition of A Prarie Home Companion.
Why are the Vikings like possums?
They play dead at home and get killed on the road.
The guy needs to start correcting his own issues, but that he’s the 16th ranked QB on the season with both an offensive line and WR corps in the bottom 5 of the league has to be factored in. He’s also is a pass happy offense with a middling running game. All factors are recipes for trouble. How efficient would he be on say the Jets or Chiefs offenses? The Texans or the Giants? All more examples of how his constantly losing the PR game gets him killed in mindshare.
Not to imply that the good Mr. might tell an unoriginal joke, but a quick Google search brings back over 28,000 results of that punchline.
So, according to that, the undefeated 1972 Dolphins were just 1 point favorites in their Super Bowl against Washington, which seems really odd. Miami had an extremely weak schedule that year, which I assume played a role, but at first glance that Washington team just looks like a typical playoff contender, not a world-beater. The only thing I can think of is that the Redskins cruised through their first two playoff games (combined score: 42-6), while Miami played two relatively close games to get there.
And what’s really weird is that the AFC Championship game that year was played **@** Pittsburgh. So, either the turf at the Orange Bowl spontaneously combusted two days before the game, or … yeah, Wikipedia confirms that home field advantage was determined by a yearly divisional rotation through the 1974 season. Hmm. That was pretty stupid.
Also there had only been one AFL/AFC favorite before that, and that was Baltimore, who had moved over from the NFL to the AFC. So I think there was also a definite feeling that the AFC was just generally weaker.
Aaron Rodgers last year with the O Line that gave up the most sacks in the league was still a top 5 QB with a QB rating above 100. I completely understand that his crappy O Line and WR crew certainly don’t help him all that much, but he’s still not shown me that he’s a great NFL quarterback. Maybe with a couple first round draft picks and a third rounder, they could have gotten a better O Line or WR crew also.
Again, Aaron Rodgers had more attempted passes and an even worse running game, and yet he managed to be a top 3 QB this year. And there are a ton of QB’s who had more attempts this year than Cutler, including studs like Kyle Orton, Carson Palmer, Eli Manning, and others. One guy who had about the same number of attempts (441 to Cutlers 432), same TD/Int ration (23 TDs 15 int to Cutlers 23 TDs, 16 int) was none other than the ever studly Ryan Fitzpatrick.
I agree that Cutler gets screwed by the media (in part because of his own obstinence), especially on this whole knee thing. But that doesn’t make him a great QB. With his potential, and his excuses, he really needs to start producing better.
I’m pretty sure I didn’t compare Rodgers and Cutler anywhere. I’ve never said that Rodgers isn’t an elite QB and I never said Cutler was or was close to being in that elite class with Brady, Manning, Brees and Rodgers. He’s got the physical skills to get there, but thus far not the head or support staff.
Saying Cutler can never be a franchise QB because he’s the 16th best QB in the league this year is a really thin argument though. With better WRs and a less opaque offensive scheme, maybe even the freedom to call an audible now and again, he could still be a franchise QB. It’s his 4th season and he hasn’t had any continuity or anyone to instill discipline in him thus far. It’s not too late though.
You still mock the trade. Which team is in a better position right now? The Broncos with Orton, Tebow and a new head coach and a bunch of potential bust rookies or the Bears with Cutler, stability at coach and a chance to get better? Who’s gonna be better off in 3 years?
I would actually put Roethlisberger in the elite class. Right now if I were to rank the QBs
Tier One: Brady, P. Manning, Roethlisberger
Tier Two: Brees, Rodgers
Tier Three: Rivers, Ryan
Tier Four: Vick, Sanchez, Romo, Flacco, Schaub, Cutler
Tier Five: Freeman, E. Manning, Cassell
TBD: Bradford, Stafford
It appeared you were giving reasons why Cutler’s ranking didn’t reflect his abilities or value. I simply questioned the extent of those excuses.
Cutler is, nearly by definition, a franchise QB. The Bears gave up 2 first rounders, a third rounder, and Orton for him, they’re paying him a ton of money (he was the second highest paid QB in 2009), and there’s nothing but garbage and hopes behind him on the depth chart, so he is the Bears’ franchise quarterback.
The issue isn’t that he’s a franchise QB, he is. The issue is how good is he?
Of course it’s not too late, he could easily develop into a top 10 QB in the future. But I haven’t seen it yet.
The Broncos sucking on defense doesn’t, to me, have a whole lot to do with judging the trade. Orton outperformed (statistically at least) Cutler both last year AND this year, and there’s 2 first round draft picks. How’d that O Line look with Maurkerice Pouncey and Mike Iupati? Or those WR’s with Percy Harvin, Hakeem Nicks, Austin Collie, or Jeremy Maclin?
It may end up that Cutler will prove to be worth giving up a higher rated QB two years straight, and the draft picks. That’s what the Bears were banking on after all. The jury is still out, but I wouldn’t be to heartened by the early results.