Alabama v. Clemson Discussion

[Jimmydafreak]

Dang Jimmy, feeling it, eh? This is my least confident Bama nat'l title game of the last 4. I hope you're right!

I am. Find that prop bet (Alabama -21.5) and bet it. No need to thank me.

:cheers3:

 

[emkee]

Damn Jimmy, seems like you're in every forum on the internet touting Bama.

Excited much.

 

[gps_3]

If I hear another analyst say that a mobile QB is Alabama's kryptonite, I'm going to barf. We get it. Biggest sign that there's too much time between games is that they ran out of new things to say 5 days ago

 

[Jimmydafreak]

Damn Jimmy, seems like you're in every forum on the internet touting Bama.

Excited much.

I'm going to make my money, so it's all the same to me. I'm just doing my best to prevent others from making the galactically stupid wager of Clemson plus anything.

 

[Monger]

Mackensie Alexander with a bad hammy. Could be big.

 

[emkee]

Mackensie Alexander with a bad hammy. Could be big.

That is big, real big.

 

[emkee]

They're saying he'll play but will be limited.

 

[dudleysdad]

man, the more and more I look at this game.. I might blast this OVER.

 

[nbafan88]

Played Clemson TT over 23.5 +105

 

[gps_3]

Added some props on Ridley and Stewart with the news of Alexander

 

[gps_3]

man, the more and more I look at this game.. I might blast this OVER.

I have the under, but it feels like this game is either well under, or way over. Alabama only had 3 games go over 50 all season, and one was against Charleston-Southern. Clemson on the other hand, had 10 games go over this number. The 4 that didn't were Louisville, Notre Dame, FSU, and Wake

 

[dudleysdad]

I have the under, but it feels like this game is either well under, or way over. Alabama only had 3 games go over 50 all season, and one was against Charleston-Southern. Clemson on the other hand, had 10 games go over this number. The 4 that didn't were Louisville, Notre Dame, FSU, and Wake

well, most people see Bama scoring and I dont see Clemson being shut out, hell they are going to go full throttle all damn game, even if bama is up 31-0 late in the 3rd clemson will still be swingin away

 

[gps_3]

Yeah I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying it never sniffs the over, or flies over. Don't see it landing on 48-52 points. Could be wrong. I am a lot

 

[dudleysdad]

Yeah I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying it never sniffs the over, or flies over. Don't see it landing on 48-52 points. Could be wrong. I am a lot

yeah not arguing here
i was not even looking at the total and then i started thinking

 

[tipyerbartender1]

I'm going to make my money, so it's all the same to me. I'm just doing my best to prevent others from making the galactically stupid wager of Clemson plus anything.

Jimmy, what's got a better shot, powerball or Clemson ATS?

 

[emkee]

Bama seriously suck on 3rd down.

There is a reason Lane Kiffin got assholed out of USC.

 

[gps_3]

Bama seriously suck on 3rd down.

There is a reason Lane Kiffin got assholed out of USC.

Yeah it's been frustrating. Part of the reason, and especially in the first half of the season, I bet we were in 3rd and 6+ on 75% of our 3rd downs. Interestingly last season, we were either the best in the nation, or close to it, in 3rd down conversions on offense, and at the bottom on defense. Exact opposite this season

 

[Jimmydafreak]

Jimmy, what's got a better shot, powerball or Clemson ATS?

PB

:shake:

 

[emkee]

Bama's only glaring advantage is special teams but then you ask yourself why is Clemson receiving more than 4 points.

Undefeated teams in the Final game stink vs teams that managed to register a loss.

Still chewing on this one but lean Crimson.

 

[emkee]

Bama's only glaring advantage is special teams but then you ask yourself why is Clemson receiving more than 4 points.

Undefeated teams in the Final game stink vs teams that managed to register a loss.

Still chewing on this one but lean Crimson.

Does not help that the asshole/mush quota on Bama compared to Clemson is about 8-2...

 

[D-Woww]

lets just call it like it is: the line is exactly where it should be, there is no value on either side, and aside from the need to wager on the NC game, there is absolutely no good reason to take either side. Clemson could win SU, or Bama could win by 30. Neither would surprise me. Not like last year when OSU was a great play. Lets just enjoy the game, fellas. I know thats not the popular attitude for a gambling forum, but picking a side is = to betting the coin toss

 

[Jimmydafreak]

Bama's only glaring advantage is special teams but then you ask yourself why is Clemson receiving more than 4 points.

Undefeated teams in the Final game stink vs teams that managed to register a loss.

Still chewing on this one but lean Crimson.

Clemson will get absolutely destroyed in the trenches on both sides of the ball. That's the Alabama advantage, and it is large one.

 

[Capone]

Nice info

Played Bama -6.5 already.

I think they win by 10 points. To me, its ACC vs SEC. I think the ACC is weak, no defense.
37-27 Bama

LOL at saying the ACC is weak vs the SEC .Guess someone forgot FSU-Auburn just two years ago.

 

[Capone]

Undefeated teams in the Final game stink vs teams that managed to register a loss.

Ah, FSU-Auburn just 2 year ago

 

[captjohn67]

LOL at saying the ACC is weak vs the SEC .Guess someone forgot FSU-Auburn just two years ago.

http://www.mcubed.net/ncaaf/tvc/sec/acc.shtml

 

[emkee]

Ah, FSU-Auburn just 2 year ago

FSU were a -10.5 fave in that game and failed to cover.

Weak basis for an argument.

 

[RetroVK]

Game is going to struggle to see points unless Coker goes off which seems unlikely.

My instinct on the side says bama wins, clemson covers but who cares when you can take the under and lose on two nonoffensive scores and overtime.

 

[Capone]

FSU were a -10.5 fave in that game and failed to cover.

Weak basis for an argument.

Not a chance. You said undefeated teams stink vs 1 loss teams. You didn't say a thing about ATS

 

[twinkie13]

Dang Jimmy, feeling it, eh? This is my least confident Bama nat'l title game of the last 4. I hope you're right!

oh fuck off lol

 

[M.W.]

FSU were a -10.5 fave in that game and failed to cover.

Weak basis for an argument.

Auburn had a huge matchup advantage in that game. AU's biggest strength went against FSU's biggest weakness. Very unlucky draw for an FSU team that would have covered 10.5 against any other team.

 

[Capone]

http://www.mcubed.net/ncaaf/tvc/sec/acc.shtml

Yeah. SEC was 5-4 vs the ACC this year. Complete domination. Good point

 

[M.W.]

Bama's only glaring advantage is special teams but then you ask yourself why is Clemson receiving more than 4 points.

Undefeated teams in the Final game stink vs teams that managed to register a loss.

I believe they're 5-5 or 6-5 ATS since 1980, including Clemson over Nebraska in 1981.

 

[twinkie13]

AUB really shoulda won the NC, I thought

 

[twinkie13]

no play for me tonight....

gl

 

[M.W.]

Clemson will get absolutely destroyed in the trenches on both sides of the ball. That's the Alabama advantage, and it is large one.

This is highly unlikely.

 

[captjohn67]

Yeah. SEC was 5-4 vs the ACC this year. Complete domination. Good point

never said it was, I simply posted a link. I should just stick to posting plays. Good luck this evening.

 

[dudleysdad]

anyone playing props??

 

[emkee]

I believe they're 5-5 or 6-5 ATS since 1980, including Clemson over Nebraska in 1981.

4-5 SU (2-7 ATS) since 1983.

2-3 SU (0-5 ATS) last 5 ('04, '06, '11, '12, '13).

 

[madshooter]

looking for the middle....Bama -1 and Clemson +7....Need a close 1 possession game.

 

[emkee]

Undefeated finalists are 1-4 SU and ATS. Saban-led Bama responsible for the 2 most recent.

 

[M.W.]

4-5 SU (2-7 ATS) since 1983.

2-3 SU (0-5 ATS) last 5 ('04, '06, '11, '12, '13).

Nope - don't know about the last 5, but the 4-5/2-7 figures are off. There aren't nearly enough results. I ran the numbers a couple weeks ago.

In fact, I ran the numbers just for undefeated teams playing for the national title that were dogs to one-loss teams, and got 6-4 ATS, including two before 1983.

They have four covers in the dog role in your time range (Syr 1987, Neb 1993, Tenn 1998, Okla 2000, plus UGA in 1980 and Clemson in 1981) -- there can't possibly be just two covers for dogs, picks, and faves combined.

 

[Capone]

Nope - don't know about the last 5, but the 4-5/2-7 figures are off. There aren't nearly enough results. I ran the numbers a couple weeks ago.

In fact, I ran the numbers just for undefeated teams playing for the national title that were dogs to one-loss teams, and got 6-4 ATS, including two before 1983.

They have four covers in the dog role in your time range (Syr 1987, Neb 1993, Tenn 1998, Okla 2000, plus UGA in 1980 and Clemson in 1981) -- there can't possibly be just two covers for dogs, picks, and faves combined.

Not only emkee using worthless stats to make his pick, he's making up the stats.

Good stuff

 

[dudleysdad]

off topic since i see tebow on tv
last night i saw him interview that broad who sings "fight song"
it looked during that interview he could have banged her.. if he wasn't staying a virgin

 

[emkee]

Not only emkee using worthless stats to make his pick, he's making up the stats.

Good stuff

Nothing made up Capone. All supported, filters maybe a little off on pre-2000 games. Will re-check.

Shit that happened 10+ years ago has little bearing anyhow. Just throwing it out there as some are interested.

Never use worthless stats to make picks pal.

Figure you're on Clemson, may the best team win either way.

 

[emkee]

Nope - don't know about the last 5, but the 4-5/2-7 figures are off. There aren't nearly enough results. I ran the numbers a couple weeks ago.

In fact, I ran the numbers just for undefeated teams playing for the national title that were dogs to one-loss teams, and got 6-4 ATS, including two before 1983.

They have four covers in the dog role in your time range (Syr 1987, Neb 1993, Tenn 1998, Okla 2000, plus UGA in 1980 and Clemson in 1981) -- there can't possibly be just two covers for dogs, picks, and faves combined.

Issue with the filter was it was only showing games played on a Monday based on BCS inputs and vs teams with 1 or more loss.

Will run it again minus that.

 

[RetroVK]

Game is going to struggle to see points unless Coker goes off which seems unlikely.

My instinct on the side says bama wins, clemson covers but who cares when you can take the under and lose on two nonoffensive scores and overtime.

Literally the only thing I got right.

 

[Capone]

Well, Bama won but I won my bet, so I'll concede SEC > ACC for this year.


Would like to see those two team play a best of 3 series

 

[emkee]

These were the final consensus numbers, Vegas nailed it. (Spread, ML, Total)

[TABLE="class: tableOdds"]
<tbody id="oddsBody" style="outline: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">[TR="class: row-4"]
[TD="class: team"]45

40FINAL


151 Alabama
152 Clemson(n)

[/TD]
[TD="class: pct, align: center"]61%
39%
[/TD]
[TD="class: pct, align: center"]33%
67%
[/TD]
[TD="class: pct, align: center"]61%
39%

[/TD]
[/TR]
</tbody>[/TABLE]

 

[RetroVK]

Over was the play in the game. I cannot find it in the data but it was absolutely the right play.

 

[M.W.]

Well, Bama won but I won my bet, so I'll concede SEC > ACC for this year.


Would like to see those two team play a best of 3 series

Of course, the SEC's better. It's not even close. ACC's been better just five years since the end of the 800 Rule: 1979 and 1990 the ACC was *WAYYYY* better. 1981, 2004, 2005, ACC was slightly better. In 1979, just a couple years after Steely Dan recorded Deacon Blues, Wake Forest finished second in the SEC! Wake Fucking Forest!