ESPN Handicapper Picks--Week 9

TahoeLegend

Pretty much a regular
Interesting pick by Steve on Kansas. I'm not betting it, but it seems impossible Okla State can score enough to cover a number that big. In their comments Steve said his Penn State is one of those you know is wrong as soon as you make it and Bear said the same about his Miss St pick. On his Nebraska pick he said, I deserve what I get if that one loses.

Stanford Steve— Week 9 (0-0) Season (22-21) Best Bet (3-2) 2020 Season (32-27)
Notre Dame -3 (-120)
Penn State +18.5
Kansas +30.5
Fresno State +1
Clemson -9.5

Greg McElroy Week 9 (0-0) Season (13-11)
S Diego State -1
Oregon State -1x
BC/Syracuse u 50x

The Bear— Week 9 (0-0) Season (15-23) 2020 Season (25-21)
North Carolina +3.5
Georgia/Fla Over 51
Mississippi State +1.5
Iowa State -7
Nebraska -7.5
Colorado State +2.5
Bank Picks— Week 8 (2-1) (12-12)

Phil Steele-- Week 9 (0-0) Season (29-29)
2020 Season (27-40)
Fla St +9x
Okla/T Tech o 66x
BC +6x
UCF -10x
Yale -1x
Richmond +3

Scott Van Pelt— Week 9 (0-0) Season (27-25) 2020 Season (42-39)
Florida +14
Wisconsin -3x
California +1x
Houston -x
Miss State +1x
N C State -6x
Washington +2x

Colin Cowherd Blazing Five— Week 8 (0-0) Season (16-25) 2020 Season (35-37)
Buffalo (-14)
Indy (-2.5)
NE (+4.5)
Jax (+3.5)
NO (+4.5)

My Picks— Week 9 (0-0) Season (31-19) 2020 Season (48-31)
SMU +3
Iowa +3x
Baylor ML (125)
N Dame ML (180)
CSU +2x
Fresno St +1
Thought about Virginia all afternoon, but finally passed

Gameday Super Dog Pick, Season Record
Desmond—6-2
Lee—Ohio 4-3-1
Reece—5-3
Kirk—5-3
David—3-5
 
Last edited:
ML DOG PICKERS:
Pamela Maldonado
Week 9 (0-0) Season (12-11)

Zac Al-Khateeb
Week 9 (0-0) Season (12-12)
Navy
Ole Miss
North Carolina

Bill Trocci
— Week 9 (0-0) Season (11-13)

Michigan State
Miami (Fla)
Virginia Tech

Bill Bender-- Week 9 (0-0) Season (9-15)

Temple
Iowa
Virginia
 
Last edited:
ESPN D-League Pickers:

Tyler Fulghum
—Season 12-8
Florida St +10
Mizzou -16
Iowa +3x

Joe Fortenbaugh—Season 15-16
Mich/Mich St u 51
Auburn -2.5
Kentucky -1
Under 61

Bill Connelly
—Season 20-18
UCF -10x
North Texas +2.5
Clemson -10
Hawaii +5.5
SMU +1

Doug Kezirian—Season 18-17
Cincinnati -24x
Oregon -24

David M. Hale—Season 11-12
Buffalo -13x
Clemson -10
Virginia +2.5

Joey and Jesse Virtual Locks
Joey Week 9 (0-0) Season (7-8)
2020 Season (14-12)

Matt Week 9 (0-0) Season (8-7)
No 2020 Season
 
not sure that a great lesson tho, bad teams make for some good bets! if it was that easy then why we all not rich just fading "bad teams", and what exactly defines bad? i mean are we talking ucon/umass bad? in that case i agree, but i like usf a lot on thursday and nobody would accuse them of being good! hell i even lean troy against CC which another pretty bad team. lol...Look no further than SVP holding his own, that dude plays pretty much nothing but really bad teams!!
 
looks like im against McElroy right out the gates too,, havnt played or decided yet but im either playing fresno or passing. i dont think sdst has the offense.
 
im with you on iowa, just dont see how they lose a game i think you gonna have to throw to score and Mertz the opposing qb?
 
Tahoe has a heavily correlated philosophy about bad teams (poor records / losing records straight up) being bad ATS teams and good teams (winning records straight up) being good ATS teams. I trust and know there is a lot of history and confidence from him in this philosophy.

One of my counterpoints has always been that you can pick and choose spots on bad teams just as you can pick and choose spots with good teams. It is true that when you look at the season ending SU and ATS record, good teams will generally win more ATS and bad teams will generally lose more ATS. However, few people ride a team the entire season, every game. We all move in and out of teams as our instincts tell us to do. So one can win bets on bad teams and one can lose bets on good teams.

Take UConn as one. Sure they are 1-8 SU and 4-5 ATS - both losing overall. But nobody bets on or against UConn every week. For a while some people were fading them weekly, but then lines adjust to that and how bad they are over time and eventually they cover some and maybe the team actually plays better at some point, or their opponents play worse vs them. 0-3 ATS to start season, then 3-0 ATS, now alternating losses/wins/losses. I have bet against UConn, I have bet on UConn. It just depends...on, well... a lot of things.

I think it is fine if somebody wants to avoid relying upon bad teams to win them money as a general principle and it is probably wise atleast from a perception standpoint if somebody is publicly giving plays that they not be on teams who play poorly more often than not. I however, do not think they should be completely avoided because part of the problem is...who is bad?

In the moment, while the season is going on, it is hard to know who is bad and who is not. It is easier to look back in hindsight and piece it together after all the results are known. Take ULM as an example. Are they bad? They certainly were bad, or we thought they were. Then look at their huge upsets, three of them this year. They actually are 4-3 SU right now, so they are a winning team right now. Maybe at season's end they will be a losing team. While it is happening I don't think it is as easy to avoid bad teams then to say it is after the season, teams with losing records right now might finish with winning records and teams with winning records might finish with losing records. There is no way to really know this ahead of time so I think if Alabama will cover should be weighed the same as if considering if South Alabama will cover, one good, one bad...on any given week one might cover and one might not. Will Alabama finish the season with a better ATS record than South Alabama? Perhaps, maybe in most years, yes. But nobody is betting every Alabama game or against every South Alabama game so overall season ending ATS records that aren't fully known yet, to me, mean little for in season decisions.
 
Oh I’m certainly not saying my way any better than another. Really just depends what we consider a “bad” team? I have no doubt some the teams I play can be thought of as bad (record wise anyway), I guess I don’t really look at them as bad when I’m playing them, most the time there things I like about said bad team if I’m playing them. We took Arizona last week and even I can admit they really bad! Just not 17 points worse than udub! Lol. It all relative.
 
One of my counterpoints has always been that you can pick and choose spots on bad teams just as you can pick and choose spots with good teams.
You can pick and choose all right, but if you bet on a loser team you are betting into a proposition that loses at a rate correlating with their SU record.

It' s the same as walking up to the craps table and deciding whether to bet the pass line of a field bet. You may guess right on that particular roll if you choose the field, but over time you will get mauled much faster betting on the low percentage pick.

As for not knowing who is a winning or losing team, that is somewhat correct after two or three games, although even in the first few games we know from past years which teams are endless losers. Is there a single person in the country who did not know Kansas and UMass and Vanderbilt and...well you get the idea.

But after a few games we know for sure. The correlation is not always 100%, but it's very close. I just took a quick look at ATS records this year. Only had time to look at the top and bottom ten. Of the top 10 best ATS, seven have excellent winning records, five either undefeated or one loss, one .500, 80% at .500 or better, two with losing records. So 80% of the teams with the best ATS records have winning records SU

Of the worst 10 teams ATS, two--Mizzou and Clemson--are 4-3 SU, all the rest below.500, half with either no wins or one win, so 80% of the worst teams ATS have losing records SU

If you really think a bettor can find a way to bet into those percentages and win long term you will revolutionize the gambling industry
 
Last edited:
Here's another way to look at it. If you bet on those top ten teams ATS you are betting on a proposition that wins 74% of the time. Bet on those bottom 10 you win 12% of the time

The percentage gets closer to .500 as you move toward the teams with SU records of .500, as it does every year, but those numbers for teams with the worst records SU never changes or varies from year to year. You will lose at more than an 80% rate

That's why it finally dawned on McElroy to stop betting on bad teams. It has never paid off, it never will pay off. It cannot pay off. I don't know what the worst bet is in a casino, but it's better than betting into an 80% plus losing proposition
 
You can pick and choose all right, but if you pick a loser you are betting into a proposition that loses at a rate correlating with their SU record.

It' s the same as walking up to the craps table and betting either the pass line of placing a field bet. You may guess right on that particular roll, but over time you will get mauled much faster betting on the low percentage pick.

As for not knowing who is a winning or losing team, that is somewhat correct after two or three games, although even in the first few games we know from past years which teams are endless losers. Is there a single person in the country who did not know Kansas and UMass and Vanderbilt and...well you get the idea.

But after a few games we know for sure. The correlation is not always 100%, but it's very close. I just took a quick look at ATS records this year. Only had time to look at the top and bottom ten. Of the top 10 best ATS, seven have excellent winning records, five either undefeated or one loss, one .500, 80% at .500 or better, two with losing records.

Of the bottom ten, two--Mizzou and Clemson--are 4-3, all the rest below.500, half with either no wins or one win, 80% with losing records SU

If you really think a bettor can find a way to bet into those percentages and win long term you will revolutionize the gambling industry

man, we so disagree on this. i mean if you talking about betting them to win straight up sure that probably not a great idea, although once again i think there are times taking a bad team ml is warranted based off matchup, situation, opponent, PRICE, and various other things .

far as ats goes bad teams can be great bets cause they often get more points than they should based off their poor perception, there only 25 or so teams with a ats record of 2-5 or worse and several of those teams i dont think would be considered "bad".. the great majority of teams are sporting a 3-4 ats record or better, some good teams, some bad teams.. think we would all agree New Mexico st is freaking awful yet they are 6-2 ats! betting them certainly hasnt been a long term losing situation, there a whole gang of winning teams that sporting 3-4 or 2-5 ats records..

i feel like i gotta be missing something or we categorizing bad teams differently? like obviously im not looking to bet the ucon/umass/kansas's of the world but i did play usf tonight, i think they could very well win straight up and they getting 10 points! i dunno how that kind of bet is gonna get me killed long term? Either way i totally respect your opinion and everyone should stick to what works for them as there certainly more than one way to go about this and have success. There some guys i respect who bet pretty much all big favs and do well, i would go broke trying that but it works for them!!
 
i feel like i gotta be missing something or we categorizing bad teams differently? like obviously im not looking to bet the ucon/umass/kansas's of the world but i did play usf tonight, i think they could very well win straight up and they getting 10 points! i dunno how that kind of bet is gonna get me killed

It's simple. The teams you list you are not looking to bet are teams with dismal SU records, year after year, and their ATS percentage is always directly correlates to their SU percentage. Not a precise, correlation, because there are always a couple of exceptions in both extremes, but a direct correlation.

USF is a good example. Over the last four years they are two games below .500 SU, one game below .500 ATs. Direct correlation. I don't classify them with the teams you name that that you don't bet--the reason you don't bet them is because they are disaster ATS which is exactly what they are SU--but I see them as a .500 proposition.

You are not betting into a percentage sure to lose, so when you see a spot that looks good you gamble on it.

It is a bet you are sure to go .500 on over the long haul, but if you pick your spots right you can win more than you lose on USF

You cannot possibly win on the worst teams, the loser teams. Which is why you list the losers as teams you don't bet
 
back to more important things, why you think this a sandwich spot for Fresno? i understand they off nevada and have boise next but this game more important than boise imo, if they can beat sdst it puts them in a great spot to be representing their side the MW in the championship game! plus sdst a perennial MW contender so feel like they hold just as much cache as nevada or boise, so to me it just another game in a tough mw stretch for them. Im certainly open to hearing why you dont like this for them cause from a matchup standpoint i love Fresno here. Fresno defense has been much more stout against the run than i thought they were gonna be coming into the year, crazy enough Hawaii the only team who has been incredibly successful running on them! (crazy game this can be! lol). That said im not sure they have faced a team with this type of power run game, they have held a lot of good rushing teams well below their norms and their dline metrics stack up very favorable to sdst offensive line numbers..

On the other side Aztecs defense is obviously very good but they have not played any team who is gonna challenge their pass d like this Fresno offense is going to.. We not talking just a small difference because fresno passing attack is very good, we talking about a schedule where the best passing team Aztecs have faced is San jose st maybe? but they didnt have their qb in that game! New mexico st to start the season? they threw for over 300 yards! Point being we really dont know how good sdst pass d is. We do know Fresno will challenge them tho.. another question mark in this game is sdst passing game, they switched qbs before last weeks game but we didnt get to see much as Aztecs controlled AF in a game that had very few total plays and aztecs avg starting field position was the 41 yard line!! Im pretty confident in saying the QB is gonna have to make some plays that lead to putting points on the board if they want to have any chance in competing in this game.. Really not sure what it will look like as i really cant find any games where Aztecs were forced to throw more than pass, majority the games it not even close. Dont think they can win this game doing that, not saying they cant win but think they gonna have to deviate out their comfort zone to do so..
 
It's simple. The teams you list you are not looking to bet are teams with dismal SU records, year after year, and their ATS percentage is always directly correlates to their SU percentage. Not a precise, correlation, because there are always a couple of exceptions in both extremes, but a direct correlation.

USF is a good example. Over the last four years they are two games below .500 SU, one game below .500 ATs. Direct correlation. I don't classify them with the teams you name that that you don't bet--the reason you don't bet them is because they are disaster ATS which is exactly what they are SU--but I see them as a .500 proposition.

You are not betting into a percentage sure to lose, so when you see a spot that looks good you gamble on it.

It is a bet you are sure to go .500 on over the long haul, but if you pick your spots right you can win more than you lose on USF

You cannot possibly win on the worst teams, the loser teams. Which is why you list the losers as teams you don't bet

So are we strictly talking the teams in the 100s as bad teams? if that the case it makes far more sense to me. i think the whole basis of this discussion is the classification of what a "bad" team is! lol.. i often hear ppl say a team is terrible when they have a power rating in the 50s-70s range and i always think it a tad dramatic to say they "terrible" or as my guy chuck Barkley would say "turrribible, just turrible" , lol.
 
You're getting into shit teams but perceived to be good teams. There's no formula, it's why handicapping is a skill, not just gambling. Clemson and Oregon are far from shit teams this season but their ATS records show the bias
 
back to more important things, why you think this a sandwich spot for Fresno? i understand they off nevada and have boise next but this game more important than boise imo, if they can beat sdst it puts them in a great spot to be representing their side the MW in the championship game!
I agree, and I lean to Fresno. It makes sense to me this should be the game for Fresno, but I still wonder the high from last week has any effect this week.
 
I agree, and I lean to Fresno. It makes sense to me this should be the game for Fresno, but I still wonder the high from last week has any effect this week.

i cant imagine it took any more out of them that that physical AF game at altitude did to sdst. i really like Fresno but we at that number where i could see fresno getting bet to the fav, i hate backing teams that open as dogs and get bet to favs. cost myself a winner cause of that last week tho, passed on k-st thanks to the line flip, thought it was right till the end. earlier in the year i cashed a gophers ticket at colorado because line flipped.. some ppl say this is a bad theory but it seems rock sound to me, i trust the oddsmakers more than the money that flips the fav..
 
Added Stanford Steve and Bear picks. Left Steve's comment on one of his picks in because it sounds like every bettor I've ever known, including me.

Stanford Steve— Week 9 (0-0) Season (22-21) Best Bet (3-2) 2020 Season (32-27)
Notre Dame -3 (-120)
Penn State +18.5 (Steve's comment about this pick: “Sometimes you know you're wrong as soon as you make a decision. This is one of those times. I'll take the road team plus the points.)
Kansas +30.5
Fresno State +1
Clemson -9.5

The Bear— Week 9 (0-0) Season (15-23) 2020 Season (25-21)
North Carolina +3.5
Georgia/Fla Over 51
Mississippi State +1.5
Iowa State -7
Nebraska -7.5
Colorado State +2.5
 
i hate backing teams that open as dogs and get bet to favs.
So do I. It doesn't make sense because if I think they are better then I think they should be giving points. And if they had opened at -1 then I would like it right away. Plus, we know the line is an arbitrary number

But minds aren't always logical so I feel the same way. I feel like I'm getting screwed even though I think the team is better and would have laid the -1 if it had started that way
 
Last edited:
One of those strange situations where the team that's undefeated this late in the season is playing at home and likely hearing from everyone and their in-laws how Fresno is the team that will take them down. Next week seems a much better opportunity to fade SDSU to me.
 
So do I. It doesn't make sense because if I think they are better then I think they should be giving points. And if they had opened at -1 then I would like it right away. Plus, w we know the line is an arbitrary number

But minds aren't always logical so I feel the same way. I feel like I'm getting screwed even though I think the team is better and would have laid the -1 if it had started that way

smarter guys than i always give me the "fluid market" or whatever the fuck they call it.. but here the thing, odds-makers have more info than us, know more than us, etc etc etc. i understand their goal is to set a line that gets even action, that said when they open a team as a fav to me that says said team is better whether i agree or not!! (who am i? lol). the money that disagrees with the books assessment no matter how "sharp" i still dont think knows more than the books! it really is kinda stupid when i think about it, not this part i already started but the fact this move crossing 0 matters to me when no other moves make me flinch!! lol.

could be a very arbitrary thing in my head, i cant help it tho, ever since someone i respect told me this and the logic behind it a long long time ago i bought in ever sense!! tracking has never been a strength of mine and i no doubt miss several of these (cause im talking every sport) i cant say how it has done overall, i just know i win far more often when i play this angle than i lose.. Last week i didnt play tech but it got me off of k-st which ended up being the wrong move, only other i recall this year was minny opening as favs to Buffs and closing as dogs, i bet minny just because of that and they won 30-0!! doesnt happen real often in football. happens more with bases..
 
One of those strange situations where the team that's undefeated this late in the season is playing at home and likely hearing from everyone and their in-laws how Fresno is the team that will take them down. Next week seems a much better opportunity to fade SDSU to me.

im not fading sdst, im playing on fresno and what i think a really tough matchup.. no way in hell ill be playing Hawaii! lol. not that you wrong, i just suck playing their games.. they wont be able to run on sdst tho, then what? i know what this week, fresno gonna throw!!
 
im not fading sdst, im playing on fresno and what i think a really tough matchup.. no way in hell ill be playing Hawaii! lol. not that you wrong, i just suck playing their games.. they wont be able to run on sdst tho, then what? i know what this week, fresno gonna throw!!
And I'll be shocked if SDSU don't push 40 pts
 
Obv I'm on SDSU already but that's a team total that will definitely be played, defensive TD and short field or two sounds about right
 
Never woulda guessed! Lol.

Have you seen their schedule this year? This a big step up in class imo.
Meant to add that their team total will be played for more likely

They've played and scored on better defenses
 
Guess when I break down the 4 quadrants, even if I were to give Fresno offense and SDSU defense a wash (I don't), I see SDSU offense as significantly better than Fresno defense. But that's why they play the game.

I don't look at yahoo numbers or whatever but have to imagine consensus gonna be big on Fresno which I simply don't get.
 
Meant to add that their team total will be played for more likely

They've played and scored on better defenses

They have played all of 1 team you could maybe argue has a better d (that they scored on), and they allowed 30 to that crappy offense that had a qb playing who not even on a roster now! They didn’t score shit on sjst or AF and really didn’t move the ball much on either. Im
Not sure those defenses are better but they sure didn’t score on them. On the other hand all the teams they have played gotta be bottom the country in passing offense. Fresno has at least played 3 pretty good teams which you be hard pressed to find me 2 good teams on Aztecs schedule. Ultimately it don’t matter, ya can only beat who ya have played so think the argument moot either way. I just think matchup wise what Fresno does well will be tougher for SDst to defend than for Fresno to defend sdst run game, no idea if they can pass if forced into that situation, how can anyone know? The qb they started last week threw all of what 12 passes for 72 yards?

I’ll say one thing where I do think sdst has a edge, they have a bad ass punter! (Not even joking),, he a weapon as their ability to score has a lot to do with field position and that guy flips it from anywhere on the field! They gonna need him!! Lol
 
Guess when I break down the 4 quadrants, even if I were to give Fresno offense and SDSU defense a wash (I don't), I see SDSU offense as significantly better than Fresno defense. But that's why they play the game.

I don't look at yahoo numbers or whatever but have to imagine consensus gonna be big on Fresno which I simply don't get.

Why would consensus be big on Fresno when sdst ranked? I don’t call Fresno offense and sdst defense a wash either, something tells me we disagree on who has the edge! Lol. I dunno how ya can know what Aztec pass d even is? Most teams in the country would have a top ranked pass d against their schedule.
 
  • Love
Reactions: KJ
Here's another way to look at it. If you bet on those top ten teams ATS you are betting on a proposition that wins 74% of the time. Bet on those bottom 10 you win 12% of the time

The percentage gets closer to .500 as you move toward the teams with SU records of .500, as it does every year, but those numbers for teams with the worst records SU never changes or varies from year to year. You will lose at more than an 80% rate

That's why it finally dawned on McElroy to stop betting on bad teams. It has never paid off, it never will pay off. It cannot pay off. I don't know what the worst bet is in a casino, but it's better than betting into an 80% plus losing proposition

This is a good explanation. I don't want to come off as arguing as we have engaged on this topic a few times. I can appreciate what you say and what you do.

And I think I do understand better now actually. When you say "bad teams" you are referring to the notoriously bad, predictably bad teams - you aren't necessarily referring to all losing teams, all teams below .500 or with losing records? You aren't referring to TCU who this year is 1-5 ATS vs FBS. Or Virginia Tech who hasn't covered since week2. Or Washington who hasn't covered vs an P5 team this year.

Is that right? You don't necessarily avoid teams with losing records or teams that are below .500, or do you? Is it just the bottom feeders we all generally know who they are?

And there are teams right now that have losing records SU but winning ATS records - Arkansas St 1-5 SU, 4-2 ATS, Bowling Green 2-6 SU, 6-2 ATS, Navy 1-6 SU, 4-3 ATS, Nebraska 3-5 SU, 5-2-1 ATS, New Mexico State 1-7 SU, 6-2 ATS, North Texas 1-6 SU, 4-3 ATS, Texas State 2-5 SU, 4-3 ATS, UNLV 0-7 SU, 4-3 ATS (there are plenty others 1 or 2 games below .500 SU but I left those off). So based off of history, you would suggest they could be faded weekly because when the season ends it is highly probable those teams ATS records will more closely resemble their losing straight up records - only if we knew if those teams would actually continue to lose SU, which we don't. Or would you simply just avoid those teams completely?

Not being purposefully critical, trying to better understand your position. Avoiding teams like Akron, Vandy, Kansas, that is wise advice for anyone to follow. I just don't know how far out you expand the "bad team" definition and to whom all it applies to...anyone below .500 or some other worse winning %?
 
Every time I play Akron I swear it won’t happen again, then I find myself saying it again! lol. They did give me one the biggest Luckbox covers I have had in some time tho! Those kind of things give me a soft spot for them!
 
You aren't referring to TCU who this year is 1-5 ATS vs FBS. Or Virginia Tech who hasn't covered since week2. Or Washington who hasn't covered vs an P5 team this year.
Those first two schools have won plenty of games and will keep winning every year. They are not champs, but they are good enough they have lots of years when you can win bets on them. Washington is a different matter. They may become a good team again, but right now they don't have a proven coach and rate a loser in my book--I won't bet them no matter what.

I wouldn't bet any of those schools you listed in the fourth paragraph. True they have better records ATS than you expect losing teams to have, at least temporarily, but not a one of them is worth a bet to me this year or any past year until they show they can win games. I don't fade a bad team either. My policy is never bet on a bad team to do anything.

As an example, just on general handicapping principles, UNLV looks like they might be a good bet this week. But I haven't bet them in years and won't until they start winning games. I don't have any interest in even looking it up, but I will bet blind--if you bet UNLV every game the last 10 years you lost money. There have been years when they were at least respectable, but I bet they are a loser over the last decade.

That's my definition of a loser. Ask Kezarian. He's 0-10 on them this year, betting on them some weeks, against them some

It is fucking hard to win betting football. College football is full of tough, well coached teams that are reliable week after week, year after year, and it's hard to win even sticking to good teams. Why would I risk my money on a bad team?.

But details of college football have nothing to do with this proposition. It's basic, elemental, gambling 101. No matter what game or what sport it is, if you bet propositions that win--long term-- at a lower percentage than it takes for you to win money, you cannot win. Period. Casinos fortunes are built on that simple fact

And every year for almost half a century the worst teams SU are also the worst teams ATS. The best teams SU are the best ATS.

There's nothing complicated about it.
 
I must be lazy or unmotivated or something. I'm having a hard time finding bets that interest me this week. There are a LOT of games I'm interesting in watching, but most of them look like the line is about right

Already bet SMU and the only others I can see anything in are Iowa, N Dame, Utah, Georgia, and W Virginia. Strong lean to the first two, lean to the next two, slight lean W Virginia.

I'd love to bet all those SEC games, Mich/Mich St, Ore St/Cal, but I can't figure them out.

Anyone with any thoughts on any of the above. I need inspiration.

Oh, almost forgot, I'd like to bet Pitt, but that seems like a lot of points. You're Mr ACC, 2daBank, you've had the ACC nailed all year. What are you thinking on that game?

I prefer dogs, s--k. Who are your favorite dogs this week?
 
^ I'll get back to your tomorrow. I should be in bed by now! Over here on eastern time...
 
Kyle Hamilton, best N Dame d-back, maybe best player on the D, is out v N Carolina

On the other hand, N Carolina has not won a game, either SU or ATS, on the road this year.
 
I have no interest in backing mia vs Pitt. Honestly don’t understand why they taking money? Just fading the spot for clemson or is there a new misguided belief in this canes team with Van Dyke? Don’t get me wrong they def look better with him and I do think he been playing better every week, that said this defense gonna be a whole different animal for him. I thought open was prob about right. I’d like to see if Pitt best rb who’s name I can’t spell and Addison clear concussion protocol? Last I read the rb seemed like he has a good chance to play. Dunno bout Addison.

I think Pitt gonna dominate both sides the ball in the trenches and really look to own time of possession. I don’t think Pitt wants to play shootouts like some their early games even if they capable of doing so and winning. As they saw against w.mich that a much more high variance game. I don’t think canes will be comfy like they been in these recent shootouts. By all accounts they love the Van Dyke kid but this gonna be a much different kind of game than he has played in thus far. Not only cause the pressure he be under but because I don’t think he gonna have a ton of opportunities with the ball. He might hit a big play or 2, god knows clemson should have, but he won’t be able to go on long drives vs this d, Everytime they punt to Pitt they gonna go to work with run game and long methodical drives I suspect. I lean under, high side I think is 35-24 and think I’m being really generous giving canes that many points. Pitt could score more if they wanted to imo but as mentioned I think they will realize they can have a lot of success on the ground and then stick with it. Pitt a very balanced team so when they see the run game having success they are gonna stick with it.
 
I think a better acc game to look at a side this week is ville at NCst, ville catching a td is pretty crazy to me.

I tried to warn ppl last week that ville defense might be closer to BCs than the numbers suggest. Same thing here, on paper ncst defense looks superior but they Havnt faced anyone who offense strikes fear then look what canes young QB did to them. On the other hand yes ville defense looks inferior defensively but as I said last week there not many teams in the county who could have faced all the offensive firepower ville has seen and put up good numbers! Last week when ville stepped down in offenses their d held up really well. 2nd week in a row they face a team who not as explosive as majority their schedule has been!

Imo these teams are petty much even on a neutral, ville really should be undefeated in acc play, they outplayed wake for stretches and had a 80% chance to win that game in the 4th. They freaking dominated uva for 3.5 quarters until letting Uva score 21 in forth. Sure we should knock them for blowing those games but they also deserve credit for looking every bit as good as wake and uva, so why are they catching 6.5/7 here? Ncst is no better than those 2 or ville. I can’t really see why this should be any more than a fg? Give me the better qb and the points and maybe a little ml as well.
 
Who has ncst even beaten besides a offensively anemic clemson? Other than them their next best win is BC amd then it nothing but cup cakes. I don’t know why I didn’t see it before last week but it was there, ncst a tad fraudulent. Now in 2 of their 3 toughest games their coaching staff called a pathetic game where they choose to let Leary drop back 40+ Times instead of get those stud rbs involved. Id assume the game plan better this week but all that does is ensure this a good game, if they let Leary throw 40+ again ville will win easily .
 
The vtech/gtech total feels awful freaking low to me. Just looking at the way yellow jackets acc games have went I’m almost scared I’m missing something? The only game that didnt fly past this number was against Clemson who can’t score 20 on anyone with a pulse!! Ive Done given up in trying to understand how Hokies score points! I still don’t know yet they manage to hang 30+ against the last 2 solid defenses they have faced! I look at this game amd it just looks like we gonna have 2 qbs running around making plays in another back amd forth acc shootout. What am I missing here?
 
Crazy to me cuse laying this number to BC but I don’t tbink it wrong. Just crazy cause where i thought both teams be at beginning the season. Now we know why I was so bummed out when BC qb went down, for weeks we tried to talk ourselves into thinking Grosel wasn’t that bad and BC could still compete, problem is he is that bad so this team never had a fighting chance. I think they will battle here, certainly not wanting to lay a td w cuse but bc really struggled with cunningham running around last week, I could see Shrader giving them similar problems. If I had to play something here it would be under 50, I think this has a chance to be more a rock fight than the other acc game cuse been playing other than clemson, actually think this looks similar to the clemson game for both teams.
 
Thought bout all I got for the acc this week, ville with the points my favorite play in the conf this week. Few total leans. No interest in fsu/clemson, can’t even begin to guess what happens there!! I suppose over maybe? How crazy would it be to play a tigers ovsr tho!?!? If tigers ever gonna score this be the week! Will they, I don’t know. I wouldn’t bet this , just saying if ya made me that were I would probably look, lol.
 
Kyle Hamilton, best N Dame d-back, maybe best player on the D, is out v N Carolina

On the other hand, N Carolina has not won a game, either SU or ATS, on the road this year.

Yes. I know you were big on Notre Dame last week. I had USC. Congratulations, the Notre Dame D earned that win. USC was haunted by four trips inside the ND 25 yard line and came away with just 3 total points. USC outgained them by 50 yards (+.7 ypp) despite losing by DD.

I think UNC is a better unit. USC has struggled in the RZ often this year. UNC is better there. UNC has the better QB. UNC's OL has been a problem this year, but Howell's running can help offset that. He rushes for 70 yards per game. His passing numbers are down, with the receivers lost somewhat understandable, but his running is a significantly different and improved part of his game. Just the run game in total, USC isn't that good at it and doesn't commit to it. UNC is a much more balanced O, better running team in a conventional sense in addition to the QB run.

ND has had their own OL and QB issues this year. While my respect has grown for ND's D...their O leaves a lot to be desired still.

I think it is a good spot for UNC. Obviously it hasn't been a great season, but off the bye with a chance to regroup here. Goes without saying both teams are not as good as they were when they faced off last year, ND was in the playoff! That game was close for 1st H and halftime then ND D smothered them in the 2nd H. I think it is a more evenly matched game this year and UNC should capitalize on some of the missed opportunities that USC could not.

I prefer dogs, s--k. Who are your favorite dogs this week?

What other underdogs do I like that might appeal to you? Did you see Stanford Steve was asked about one play on SVP last night and he replied - Kansas!

Louisville is one. 2dabank is liking them too. The LB injury for NC St might've lost the game vs Miami. That 3rd-15 conversion probably doesn't happen if Isiah Moore is in position guarding the middle of the field. You never want to be overly influenced by injuries picking games, but NC St D is getting pretty thin in spots as the season goes on. They did just have a bye 3 weeks ago, however, that Miami game might've taken something out of them and Louisville could be a little fresher.

Each team played BC recently. LV won 28-14 and NC State won 33-7. NC State's is not really that impressive when you consider the fact that the game was just 10-7 HT (BC had dropped TD on 4th-3 passing up FG) and BC imploded in the 2nd H with a dropped punt snap that NC St ran in for TD, 2min later BC throws a pick and then NC St got like an 80y TD when two BC players were around the receiver but both failed to either make a play on the ball or a tackle and the receiver splits them for a long TD catch and run. There was little evidence in the 1st H of that game that it would turn so one-sided. Louisville on the other hand was much more impressive in the 1st H vs BC, BC only crossed midfield once and LV squandered some more points with turnovers in the 1st H, but still led 21-7. BC scored TD in the 2nd H thanks to a fumble recovery on a short field. NC St outgained BC 381-279 and won 33-7. LV outgained them 438-266 and only won 28-14, but LV was more impressive play in and play out.

LV does hurt themselves at times, although as 2dabank likes to tell us, NC St also hurts themselves with the way they run their O. Devin Leary passing 35x a game on average isn't their best approach. LV played good enough vs WF and Virginia to win, blew a big lead vs Virginia and lost to WF at the gun.

Old Dominion might be on your no play list. Dollaz planted a seed for me on this one and once I started looking at it, La Tech really is kinda bad. I personally did ML them vs Miss St and SMU, lost both, but they were close to winning those games kind of inexplicably, they shouldn't have been that close with either. Then they pushed NC St pretty hard. When you look at the numbers though, it is pretty bad. Their run D appears to be average for a mid-pack P5 team, but the only teams they did well vs the run were Miss St (who doesn't try to run much) and UTEP. They've let pretty much everyone else gash them for 5 ypc. LT themselves don't run it well. Their RZ TD% scored is awful, as is their RZ D TD% allowed. They don't get pass rush on D and they get sacked pretty good clip on O. I'm not sure there is anything to really say they are good at. Kendall passes for 4th most yards in CUSA, but just a 12-9 ratio and barely 60% completions. I trust you are like me, we know little to nothing about ODU so that likely excludes you backing them. Dollarz thinks that ODU is not as bad as their record. They did nearly beat Buffalo and Marshall and came back to lose close at UTEP (I think UTEP had to hold off a comeback and kind of battle just to kill clock in that one - I had ODU 2nd H there). Just with LT being a bad favorite and on the road has my interest.

Purdue seems attractive given the 7.5 unless it is bait. Chances are Nebraska will do something to hurt themselves in this game. Jeff Brohm is 2-1 vs Scott Frost in their 3 games vs eachother. Nebraska did win by 10 last year.

Fresno State is a small dog +1 that I like quite a bit. Rare for me, I actually took San Diego St last week, I usually fade them, but the situation and the line was too much to pass up. Then Nevada was one of my bigger plays against Fresno. I think this is a good matchup for Fresno because the San Diego St O shouldn't be more than Fresno can handle. Aztecs can run it well, sometimes, not all the time, and that is about it. They occasionally hit some passes, but they miss way more than they hit. Fresno should be able to limit the damage from SD St run O and then I really like the Fresno pass game vs San Diego State. What is the best passing team to play San Diego State this year? I can't even answer that, nobody has a competent pass game who's played them. Nick Nash passed for 238 on them and he missed some big throws that would've been more. I think the San Diego State D is vulnerable through the air and Haener is usually really good. Fresno receivers are very good. As long as Haener doesn't have a another game like he did at Hawaii (4 INTs - he has only thrown 7 all year, 4 at Hawaii!).

Wondering if S Diego St might catch Fresno St in a sandwich game.

Impossible! They are both in the same division. If Fresno wins this game they most likely win the division with victories over the other two contenders. Boise is on deck, that game is on the other side of the conference. San Diego State is a much much bigger game for Fresno than Boise would be.

Several others I lean or haven;t fully developed opinions on.

I am with you on SMU. I too am thinking WVU, but am fearful because Iowa State seems to have them figured out. Check the last 3 in the series, it isn't pretty. I could see myself taking WVU 1st H rather than full game perhaps. I'd play Iowa over Wisconsin, but hard to have a great feeling about it. I would rather have Florida than Georgia. UCLA/Utah is nothing for me I don't think. Already talked about UNC/ND. Ore St/Cal is incredibly tough.

Michigan State - Michigan? I think Michigan St is good enough to stay in this game on both O and D. If Michigan won and covered, I wouldn't be shocked though. They both played Rutgers. They both played NW and they both played Nebraska. Maybe there are some clues buried within those results?
 
Last edited:
Broader view i thought play calling lost ncst the game at miami., to a lessor extent lost them the game in Starksville as well. Both games they refused to give their 2 very talented rb's the touches and instead chose to let Leary drop back to throw 40+ times!! Not sure wtf they see in him to do that? He is ok, the crazy thing is where he very good is off of play action so even if you want some dumb shit pass happy attack, despite it not agreeing with your personnel, it would help your qb a great deal if you did so off run action!! What really odd is last year when Leary was hurt i thought this OC/play caller for ncst was very clever with play design and did a good job getting the ball in pearson and knights hands. I suppose it a situation where they think more highly of Leary than anyone with eyes does! Even if i concede they know their qb and what he capable of better than i, it still doesnt make any sense for that to be a reason to go away from those 2 studs! !

last week i didnt have the stones to lay the td with ville, honestly my 1st thought was to take the points with BC but once i started looking closer i saw why the spread was where it was. I couldnt bring myself to switch and lay it but i tried to warn all the ppl i respect who i saw taking BC with the points. The main point being Ville defense prob a lot better than we think, or at least not as bad the perception is. while BC and ncst been playing weaker offenses in the acc Ville was not only playing the more high powered acc teams but also played a lot of very good offenses out of conf (remember ucf still had their qb when they played). So while Ville is all a sudden playing offenses that not as high powered as the teams they have played rest the year but on the other side Ville offense is potentially the best offense these defenses have played! in ncst a defense that now banged up as SK pointed out!!!

Id have preferred NCst won last week (for a number of reasons!) but i still think perception is they the better team here and im not sure that accurate, if ncst is better it not by a very big margin and Ville has unquestionably the better qb imo.. Im playing this today cause most the acc games ive liked have ended up moving on me and while id play ville at +4 or better (i think they win) i much rather get all the points i can as we have talked bout Ville propensity to blow games they should have won!
 
The vtech/gtech total feels awful freaking low to me. Just looking at the way yellow jackets acc games have went I’m almost scared I’m missing something? The only game that didnt fly past this number was against Clemson who can’t score 20 on anyone with a pulse!! Ive Done given up in trying to understand how Hokies score points! I still don’t know yet they manage to hang 30+ against the last 2 solid defenses they have faced! I look at this game amd it just looks like we gonna have 2 qbs running around making plays in another back amd forth acc shootout. What am I missing here?
The only thing that I can see that may happen is that Fuente could decide to move on from Burmeister and the other QBs on the VT roster are even worse than Burmeister.
 
The only thing that I can see that may happen is that Fuente could decide to move on from Burmeister and the other QBs on the VT roster are even worse than Burmeister.
Fuente is a dead man walking, no?

Has turned out to be an unusual fit
 
The only thing that I can see that may happen is that Fuente could decide to move on from Burmeister and the other QBs on the VT roster are even worse than Burmeister.

yea that probably wouldnt be good. Burmeister is terrible imo but he does run around and make things happen at times.. honestly i really lean to gtech but not happy with that number as not much value imo.. i think this a good matchup for jackets, imo the way to really cause their defense the most problems is thru the air, their front 7 isnt bad against the run and i think a team who they particularly good at defending is teams who line up and try to run on early downs then only throw when they get into 3rd and longs, overall gtech doesnt get a lot of pressure but they are top 25 in passing down sack rate despite the fact they been awful getting off the field on 3rd downs, mfers alliow teams to convert 3rd downs almost 49% of the time which ranks 123rd in the country!! surprisingly that one the few things the hokies do well.

Bare with me here im kinda going in depth on this game as i post this so things might contradict or jumble together as i find more things! starting to see why i wasnt gonna play gtech laying that number! lol.

both teams have some big flaws that i think should lead to points. assuming Burmiester the qb he and the not that talented wr corp will benefit from a bad gtech pass d and it seems incredibly obvious he gonna be able to run around and keep drives going on 3rd downs! we saw how Shrader just killed hokies on the ground and thru the air and i think simms is a more talented version of him, especially as a passer.. the more i look the more i like the over, pitt and clemson the only 2 teams jackets havnt been able to hang a pretty big number against. we said before betting pitt in that game their defense was gonna be a problem for the jackets as they also were the hokies shortly after, pitt had the team speed in the front 7 to prevent those qbs from running around and making plays, that the key to stopping both these teams and think we have plenty of evidence to suggest these defenses wont be up for the task!!

last week the hokies/cuse total was 45 and i leaned under! lol. i actually played under when hokies played ND. i still dont know how there were so many points in the ND game? i believe hokies scored off turnovers and special teams setting up or actually scoring the points. on the other side irish brought in a backup qb that had the kind of skill set we learning a real problem for hokies to defend and he ran for 67 yards and key 1st downs and a td! I was lucky i passed on the cuse under and played cuse instead, i see now why that was a bad play, real bad when ya consider how low it was! On the other hand i dont think the loss on ND/tech under was a bad play, the early stages of that game looked very much like i expected, then irish back up qb came in and started causing points for both sides, you cant really cap that shit!! So obviously this total been adjusted up from the Cuse game, is 11 points enough? maybe if we were talking identical teams but i think cuse defense is better than gtech while gtech offense is a tad more dangerous with simms looking like the better passer at this point,. not to mention we saw 75 points in the cuse game last week!! im having a real hard time thinking either team struggles to score 30 here, potential to fly over the total is pretty great imo.
 
Back
Top