Possible Trend

S

Schrute

Assistant __ ___ Regional Mod
I was thinking there is so much human element to making the lines in college football and generally there can be very drastic changes week to week based on perception of a team based on their previous four quarters. So I got to thinking that obviously Vegas is going to adjust and have their perceptions while the general public is likely to have far more radical perceptions. Based on this I got to thinking surely every team will cover at least one of their first 5 games, whether it is based on an inspired performance, incorrect public perception or incorrect oddsmaker perception. Below are the conferences and how long it took teams to cover at least one game

SEC--Auburn and Ole Miss didn't cover until their 4th games of the season

Big 11--NW covered in their 4th lined game and Minnesota covered in their 5th game

Big 12--everyone covered before their 4th lined game of the season. Though Colorado covered -2.5 in OT against CSU and then didn't cover again until their 4th lined game

ACC--Maryland didn't cover until their 4th lined game. NC State didn't cover until their 5th lined game. Va Tech covered in their 5th lined game but they pushed in one of their first four games as well

PAC 10--Arizona didn't cover until their 4th lined game.

Big East--Louisville didn't cover until their 4th lined game. Syracuse didn't cover until their 4th lined game

As you can see, from the BCS conferences only 2 teams didn't cover until their 5th game of the year and one of those had a push in the first 5 meaning you would have actually only had 4 real bet games. I realize a lot of these teams are going to play each other early on and you may be forced into a position to bet both sides if you use this new system I just made up. Of course that doesn't make a lot of sense but it looks like it would work in theory.

If you bet 5 games in a row at $100 a game then you would stand to lose $1600 if a team doesn't cover. There are 65 BCS conference teams eligible for this "system." For it to fail you would need 4 of those teams to go on a 0-5 streak ATS to begin the season.

I just started researching this and haven't looked back at previous seasons or non-BCS conference teams so I'm not sure what that trend would show. I mainly wanted to post it here for someone to debunk it b/c it seems solid superficially. So please, debunk away

2007 Season would have yielded $6500 (+65 Units)
 
Last edited:
This is really good stuff Dwight. I'll have to look back and see how this translates to the last couple of season as well.
 
Dmoney416 said:
This is really good stuff Dwight. I'll have to look back and see how this translates to the last couple of season as well.
Click to expand...

I'll look back later as well. It gives me something to do during study breaks. I still want to look at the smaller conferences but I'm suspect about them b/c so many of the BCS conference wins came against MAC and Sun Belt teams
 
OK here are the results for 2006

SEC--Ole Miss didn't cover until the 5th game with one push involved (so really the 4th true bet, if you will). Miss State didn't cover until their 4th game. Arkansas didn't cover until their 5th game. A few close calls here. Dwight is beginning to get skeptical

Big 11--Iowa didn't cover until their 5th game. Everyone else covered within their first 3

Big 12--everyone covered within their first 3 lined games

ACC--Maryland didn't cover until their 4th lined game. UNC didn't cover until their 7th lined game of the year (-$1760 including juice). UVA didn't cover until their 5th lined game.

PAC 10--Stanford didn't cover until their 6th lined game (-$1760).

Big East--everyone covered within their first 3 lined games

OK so in 2006, betting $100 per game you would have made $2780 profit
(6300 - 3520).

Not as sweet as the $6500 for 2007, but still a solid profit of +27.8 units made by blind capping
 
Last edited:
2005 Results

SEC--everyone covered within their first 3 games

Big 11--Purdue didn't cover until their 9th lined game of the year, though they did push in week 2 at Arizona (-$1760). Everyone else covered within their first 3 weeks

Big 12--Oklahoma didn't cover until their 4th game of the season. Every other team covered in the first 3 weeks

ACC--Wake Forest didn't cover until the 5th game. Maryland didn't cover until the 4th game. Duke didn't cover until their 8th game with 1 push involved (-$1760)

Pac 10--Oregon State didn't cover until their 4th game. Everyone else covered within their first 3 games.

Big East--Cinci didn't cover until their 5th lined game with one push involved.

2005 would have yileded a profit of $2780 or +27.8 units
 
Last edited:
2004 Season

SEC--Ole Miss didn't cover until their 6th game of the season (-$1760, not a good start). Everyone else covered within their first 3

Big 11--Michigan State didn't cover until their 4th game. Everyone else covered within their first 3.

Big 12--Kansas State didn't cover until their 5th lined game. Everyone else covered within their first 3

ACC--Clemson didn't cover until their 6th lined game (-$1760). Everyone else covered within their first 3

Pac 10--Washington didn't cover until their 11th game of the season (-$1760).

Big East--Everyone covered within their first 3

2005 results -- $6200 - 5280 = +920 (9.2 Units) for the first 5 weeks
 
Last edited:
2003 Season--this is as far as I will go back

SEC--Miss State covered in their 5th game. Everyone else covered within the first 3

Big 11--Michigan State covered in their 4th game. Indiana covered in their 4th game

Big 12--Aggie didn't cover until their 6th game of the season (-$1760). Kansas State covered in their 4th lined game.

ACC--Duke covered in their 5th lined game.

Pac 10--Arizona State covered in their 5th lined game. Oregon State covered in their 4th lined game.

Big East--everyone covered within their first 3 games

2003 Results -- $6400 - 1760 = $4640 (+46.4 units)
 
Last edited:
If anyone wants me to do the other conferences then let me know. I think it will be successful as well, but I might wait a few weeks to look into the smaller conferences. I know this whole "system" or whatever kind of defeats the purpose of capping but it does seem like it could make money
 
Dwight Schrute said:
I was thinking there is so much human element to making the lines in college football and generally there can be very drastic changes week to week based on perception of a team based on their previous four quarters.

I have to break this up to respond here.

I can say, that believing there are drastic changes in one week from the previous 4 quarters is an over reaction. It is important that YOU noticed that most teams cover a number within 4-5 weeks.. But, thats because Vegas DOES NOT make drastic changes. They will ride out their "numbers" to win with, until a majority of gamblers figures out a team is hot now, and then Vegas needs it to be adjusted to either get gamblers on a team - or so they can get gamblers off a team. All pointspreads are based on public perception, long before the game is played.

Vegas uses numbers that cause the gambling majority on a game to lose the bets. Some are balanced because the "action by habit" is balanced and unless Vegas has a point spread edge, they will leave the number in place to get even action. NOT on all games though. In many cases each week, more games than people know, are lined in Vegas' favor.

So I got to thinking that obviously Vegas is going to adjust and have their perceptions while the general public is likely to have far more radical perceptions.

Actually -the public reacts very slowly, thats how Vegas can get a point spread run on a team for 4-5 games.



Based on this I got to thinking surely every team will cover at least one of their first 5 games, whether it is based on an inspired performance, incorrect public perception or incorrect oddsmaker perception.

There is Always incorrect PUBLIC perception because they (the public) doesnt know how a pointspread is composed on any game.

There is nearly NEVER incorrect oddsmaker perception because they do know what the spread is composed from. Its THEIR numbers You are betting on!
I just started researching this and haven't looked back at previous seasons or non-BCS conference teams so I'm not sure what that trend would show. I mainly wanted to post it here for someone to debunk it b/c it seems solid superficially. So please, debunk away
Click to expand...

Good luck this season. :shake:
 
G-Man said:
Good luck this season. :shake:
Click to expand...


I appreciate it. Obviously you know a lot more about this than I do as from what I've read in your posts you've been heavy into sports wagering for awhile. Thanks for your insight. Its certainly interesting to know that there are a few games Vegas has lined in their favor every week. If only I knew which games those were.

What's your overall take on the system? Obviously I've only gone back over the past 5 years but it did yield about 25 units per season which I think most would consider a very solid season. This is also only within the first 5 lined games of the year. I'd love to hear your thoughts on whether this could be consistent or is more of a 5 year aberration.
 
Dwight Schrute said:
I appreciate it. Obviously you know a lot more about this than I do as from what I've read in your posts you've been heavy into sports wagering for awhile. Thanks for your insight. Its certainly interesting to know that there are a few games Vegas has lined in their favor every week. If only I knew which games those were.

What's your overall take on the system?Obviously I've only gone back over the past 5 years but it did yield about 25 units per season which I think most would consider a very solid season. This is also only within the first 5 lined games of the year. I'd love to hear your thoughts on whether this could be consistent or is more of a 5 year aberration.
Click to expand...

I will respond here briefly. My take on the system? -- is that its perceived on results, that you have no way of knowing how the 4-5 game streak was established. In other words, you dont have a way of figuring out, what the 5 wins or losses were composed from.

Since all 5 games, by any teams point spread run, are played against 5 different teams in the schedule, you dont know how the spread was so masterfully composed by Vegas?

To prove my points, I would ask any member here to offer me the spread on the first 5 games that Texas Tech will play. Then- after they do that - tell me what bet they will make on those 5 games right now. Either on TT or against them. This way - they get to use their own numbers and have the biggest advantage. You will then see that your 'system' from the past, can carry any weight for the future?

I will document the plays - and we will all wait for the 5 games to be played in the five coming weeks. We will then compare their point spread, they gave today, with the actual closing line each week on Texas Tech.

WE can do this for up to 20 members here that want to stick out their necks now. Each member can pick a different team if they wish.

As far as Vegas having having a "few games" in their favor - its actually varied by anywhere from 15% of the games to as much as 40%. The 40% would be on a smaller week of games when there is less than a full schedule.


:shake:

 
G-Man said:
I will respond here briefly. My take on the system? -- is that its perceived on results, that you have no way of knowing how the 4-5 game streak was established. In other words, you dont have a way of figuring out, what the 5 wins or losses were composed from.

Since all 5 games, by any teams point spread run, are played against 5 different teams in the schedule, you dont know how the spread was so masterfully composed by Vegas?

To prove my points, I would ask any member here to offer me the spread on the first 5 games that Texas Tech will play. Then- after they do that - tell me what bet they will make on those 5 games right now. Either on TT or against them. This way - they get to use their own numbers and have the biggest advantage. You will then see that your 'system' from the past, can carry any weight for the future?

I will document the plays - and we will all wait for the 5 games to be played in the five coming weeks. We will then compare their point spread, they gave today, with the actual closing line each week on Texas Tech.

WE can do this for up to 20 members here that want to stick out their necks now. Each member can pick a different team if they wish.

As far as Vegas having having a "few games" in their favor - its actually varied by anywhere from 15% of the games to as much as 40%. The 40% would be on a smaller week of games when there is less than a full schedule.


:shake:
Click to expand...


I will participate in such a game if you will.
 
Hell I'll give it a shot too G-man.

I'd love to go back more than 5 years on this and may do so when/if I can find old lines on the internet. So are you saying that you don't think this is statistically significant. Basically is this something you would be willing to wager your money on? Should 4 teams or more start out 0-5 ATS then you are going to be in a world of hurt. However that seems somewhat unlikely, based on a mere 5 years. Do you give any validity to this whatsoever? Thanks again for taking time to respond G-man and VK.
 
Non-BCS Conferences and Independents 2007 (more abbreviated with results only)

Col State didn't cover until their 7th game

Every other team covered within their first 5 games

2008 Non BCS teams + Notre Dame would have yielded a 51-1 record

5100 - 1760 = $3340 (+33.4 units) for 2008 Non BCS + ND
 
I also just realized my math was wrong (but its a good error). There are actually 65 BCS teams so I will go back and edit to account for that. Basically I just need to add 10 units to each total b/c I counted wrong originally and did all my math backwards from the number 55. Sorry guys
 
vegaskyle said:
Will we be creating our own line or are we supposed to predict what the actual line will be ? obviously two different things
Click to expand...

Members must create their own lines now and make a simulated bet now, based on that number. The purpose is to show how close their lines are as to what the real lines are from Vegas on actual game day. The point is to expose perception of the spread results. The amount of spread variance will be significant as to the actual outcome of the game. Members should do their best to make this line as accurate as possible and we'll see how close anyone is.

We will then record wins and losses (W) or (L) next to the choice made, after the game is played. Both in their point spread and the Vegas point spread result on each game.

Remember, you can play on or against the actual team you have chosen to use in those 5 weeks.
 
2006 Non-BCS + Notre Dame

San Diego State didn't cover until their 6th game

Marshall didn't cover until their 6th game

Memphis didn't cover until their 9th game

Fresno didn't cover until their 7th game

La Tech didn't cover until their 6th game

2007 results for Non-BCS + Notre Dame = -$4100 (-41 Units)



So we finally see where this can kill you in the pockets.
 
2005 Non BCS + Notre Dame

Utah didn't cover until the 6th week

Rice didn't cover until the 7th week

5000 - 3520 = +$1480 (+14.8 Units)
 
2004 Non BCS + Notre Dame


51-0 (FIU wasn't fulltime I-A that year and only had 4 games lined. They did cover the spread in lined game #2 but I won't count it)

$5100 (+51 Units)
 
2003 Non BCS + Notre Dame

UCF didn't cover until their 7th game

49-1 (FIU and FAU didn't have a full set of lined games)

4900 - 1760 = $3140 ( +31.4 Units)
 
RECAP POST

BCS Conferences Last 5 Years
+176.2 Units over 5 seasons

Non-BCS + Notre Dame Last 5 Years
+89.6 Units over 5 seasons


It has no implication where Notre Dame goes in this "research" b/c they have managed to meet criteria each year.
 
I'll put the Aztecs numbers up, even though their 1st game is a non-lined event, except for maybe a couple shops...
 
horses said:
I'll put the Aztecs numbers up, even though their 1st game is a non-lined event, except for maybe a couple shops...
Click to expand...

Great. I will start a new thread with everyone in a day or two. I would like to see 20 members or more get in this, but would limit this to around 35. Anyone interested, should just respond here in this thread for now, to get in.
Member Team Choice

1. G-Man - Virginia Tech
2. Vegas Kyle -Team Choice Pending
3. Dwight Schrute - Clemson
4. Horses - San Diego St. Aztecs
5. TheGarfather - Oregon
 
Last edited:
G-man put me down for Clemson. Does it matter that 2 of their first 5 games are against FCS opponents?

If that's a problem then give me Fresno
 
Just from going through this I think this would also be profitable using the first three games of the season. Another thing would be to ride this on any team who doesn't cover in three consecutive games but has 5 more games left in their season. If anyone one is interested I will track that back over the past 5 years as well. If you're interested just let me know and I'll get it done
 
Dwight Schrute said:
G-man put me down for Clemson. Does it matter that 2 of their first 5 games are against FCS opponents?

If that's a problem then give me Fresno
Click to expand...

If anyone thinks there wont be a Vegas line on a game, you can skip that game and pick the next one on the schedule.:shake:
 
Dwight Schrute said:
Hell I'll give it a shot too G-man.

I'd love to go back more than 5 years on this and may do so when/if I can find old lines on the internet. So are you saying that you don't think this is statistically significant. Basically is this something you would be willing to wager your money on? Should 4 teams or more start out 0-5 ATS then you are going to be in a world of hurt.

Well, first of all, what do you do when two of the teams are 0-4 against the spread and they are playing each other in the 5th game. Youve already lost 8 times between the 2 teams and unless you actually wager excessively, and happen to be lucky on the play, its already a big loss.

If you are going to track this, its hard to play a team that wont be playing another with the same 0-4 record. Even, if you don't have them on your BCS list. Imagine how many teams are going to face each other with 0-1records, 0-2, 0-3, 0-4.?

Secondly, I cant wager on a team without knowing I have a reason that is 90% in my favor. That reason MUST be visible in the point spread for me. I dont use trends for plays - except maybe 1 or 2 times in a couple hundred wagers. Any trend I use is mainly unknown anyway.



However that seems somewhat unlikely, based on a mere 5 years. Do you give any validity to this whatsoever?

Sure there is validity. But where is it predictable? What if the line you have is -5.5 on a game and you bet the favorite? Then the line moves to 4.5. The game finished 26-21 and you lost, but the system trend wins only for the guy that got it at 4.5. Is it then a good trend? Or were you the only guy who lost? This is what makes trend theories so bad. They all have a spurt run but when they lose they are part of someones else's trend that won in that same game? Remember you said it yourself, that you could start off with 4-5 teams and do real bad quickly and be out of bankroll or pressing your bets badly. :shake:

Thanks again for taking time to respond G-man and VK.
Click to expand...

Youre welcome. :shake:
 
You're 2nd point is exactly what worries me. I'm not sure what lines Steele uses as reference and I'm not sure what lines I would get.

Your first point is a very good point too but its something that I've thought about. Basically the goal is to win $100 on each of the 65 teams. Therefore when 2 BCS teams play one another and have yet to win ATS you have to play both teams on the spread so long as their both not 0-4ATS at the time of the meeting, b/c then you would just end up losing juice.

The likelihood of two 0-4ATS teams actually meeting up is very low b/c most teams actually cover before week 4. The odds are just against 2 BCS teams that are both 0-4ATS going at it in Week 5 but, of course, it could happen and its a situation that would really hurt.
 
Dwight Schrute said:
You're 2nd point is exactly what worries me. I'm not sure what lines Steele uses as reference and I'm not sure what lines I would get.

Your first point is a very good point too but its something that I've thought about. Basically the goal is to win $100 on each of the 65 teams. Therefore when 2 BCS teams play one another and have yet to win ATS you have to play both teams on the spread so long as their both not 0-4ATS at the time of the meeting, b/c then you would just end up losing juice.

I cant agree that you would bet both teams in that game? It would be smarter to NOT bet the game - and save the juice if 2 teams are both without a spread win. But instead, to ride the loser for their next game with a chance to still win on them. Doesnt that make better logic? If you are trying to win +100 on a team and they are both 0-4 in this game, you have already lost 750.00 on each team and youre down 1500.00 on these two teams.. Game #1 loss is -110. To win 100 on the next (2nd) game means you are betting 210 to win 100. If you still lost - the third game bet has to be for 430 to win the 100.00. If you lost the 3rd game, then the fourth game has to be for 750 to win 100. If you bet both teams in that 5th game youre forced to bet 860 to win 100. Thats 86.00 in juice just to make a losing bet.

NOW - if you have a healthy bankroll and have been winning, what is smarter than that, is to buy the point spread on both teams in your favor and move the number in your favor on both teams. The line may be real sharp because Vegas has made good money on both of these teams already and they will post a number that just may be very close to the actual outcome. If you are going to throw away 86.00 dollars on juice for no return at all, then you may as well try to middle that 5th game. Buy 2.5 points for the dog and reduce the spread 2.5 points on the favorite. You will probably lose 260.00 in juice but you could get lucky and win both bets. If you weren't up any money, then I would lay off the game entirely.
The likelihood of two 0-4ATS teams actually meeting up is very low b/c most teams actually cover before week 4. The odds are just against 2 BCS teams that are both 0-4ATS going at it in Week 5 but, of course, it could happen and its a situation that would really hurt.
Click to expand...

:shake:
 
TheGarfather said:
So I need to give you the lines of Oregon's first 5 and who will cover each. Am I hearing this correctly?
Click to expand...

Correct. Are you in? If so I'll put you down for Oregon.

When I start a new thread I will use a deadline to post your lines and plays on or against the team.
:shake:
 
?? Are you saying bet every team until they cover? I realize its significantly significant that just about every team covers within the first five but I faiil to see how this helps.

--My interpretation is your saying bet every team early and because most will cover early, you make money. But what if these teams cover the 3rd week, then you lost two and won one. If they cover the second week you win one lose one. What am I missing here?

"If you bet 5 games in a row at $100 a game then you would stand to lose $1600 if a team doesn't cover. "

---could you explain the best quote, right now I am lost I figured it'd be 500.
 
O-State said:
?? Are you saying bet every team until they cover? I realize its significantly significant that just about every team covers within the first five but I faiil to see how this helps.

--My interpretation is your saying bet every team early and because most will cover early, you make money. But what if these teams cover the 3rd week, then you lost two and won one. If they cover the second week you win one lose one. What am I missing here?

"If you bet 5 games in a row at $100 a game then you would stand to lose $1600 if a team doesn't cover. "

---could you explain the best quote, right now I am lost I figured it'd be 500.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know it sounds ridiculous but I just did the research out of curiosity and turns out that it has yielded profit each of the last 5 years.

If a team loses in week 1 then you bet $200 in week 2. $400 in week 3, $800 in week 4 and $1600 in week 5. Its basically the Martingale method for 5 weeks. When the team covers you win $100.
 
The problem with any chase system, as G-Man has more than elaborated on, is the fact that in week 5, you will be sitting on 5-6 teams with 0-5 records ATS just praying that they hit on account of the fact you've just eaten $1500 5-6 times and you've got another $1600 riding on these same teams. That game five is statistically independant of the other 4, so there's nothing to say that 5 is the magic number for this year. It's great research, and it appears to have been successful overall, but don't forget about the bankroll you would also have to have in order to fund this thing...
 
all martingale/negative progression systems work if you have both unlimited bankroll AND unlimited limits. The problem is neither of those two things are unlimited for any of us ( if bill gates is reading, then i apologize ).

The one year where you get crushed on it makes up for all the years that you likely win.


Just about every type of negative progression has been tried in gambling and i hate to make the qoute again , as it seems i do it every few months ....

"the gutters/streets of Vegas are littered with negative progression players"

not a fan but always open minded.
 
Yeah the huge risk is what will keep me from actually playing it. My only argument is that I don't think this is a true Martingale system other than the double ups involved. The reason I say that is that after a team doesn't cover for a few weeks, I believe a bias will be employed on their line. A lot of times this bias doesn't necessarily reflect the talent of the team. As G-man said, Vegas frequently lays out lines that they are begging people to bet. For instance if LSU starts out 2-2, then the general public may see LSU as overrated and absolutely pound whoever they play in week 5. I believe this will, in turn, allow one to get a better line on LSU. Its not foolproof and only reflects my opinion. Anyways, its pretty relevant b/c I don't swing the nuts necessary to actually play this system. You would have to have nearly $10,000 in the sportsbook just to play these $100 bets. Not worth the risk IMO, but I did the research out of curiosity and figured I would at least post it
 
Dwight Schrute said:
Yeah the huge risk is what will keep me from actually playing it. My only argument is that I don't think this is a true Martingale system other than the double ups involved. The reason I say that is that after a team doesn't cover for a few weeks, I believe a bias will be employed on their line. A lot of times this bias doesn't necessarily reflect the talent of the team. As G-man said, Vegas frequently lays out lines that they are begging people to bet. For instance if LSU starts out 2-2, then the general public may see LSU as overrated and absolutely pound whoever they play in week 5. I believe this will, in turn, allow one to get a better line on LSU. Its not foolproof and only reflects my opinion. Anyways, its pretty relevant b/c I don't swing the nuts necessary to actually play this system. You would have to have nearly $10,000 in the sportsbook just to play these $100 bets. Not worth the risk IMO, but I did the research out of curiosity and figured I would at least post it
Click to expand...


i think there is some truth to what you are saying regarding line value to teams that underachieve at first .... but also unlike other true martingale systems you may have factors you dont know about. the odds of the blackjack hand you are playing are known .... not the case with people... what if a team has quit or is quitting , what if there are unknown injuries players are playing thru ? etc etc

But i hear you
 
thanks VK I was thinking about this for possibly betting UTEP as I like their matchup a little better than Houston's.

Researched and found out that there are some teams that do extend past the 5th game but it is pretty statistically significant. Only 11 teams in the past 5 years have taken longer than 5 weeks to cover. With that being said 0 years have ALL D1 teams covered within the first 5, and only 1 year did all Non-BCS schools cover in first 5. There have been 2 years BCS schools all covered but in those same years the Non BCS schools did not. So in that regard it is also significant that 1 of Houston or UTEP will not cover to continue that trend.

All in all not enough for me to bet anything especially since I have no idea on these games really besides using trends. I know if I was on the UCF or ECU side though I would be hesitant because the odds are greatly increasing for Houston or UTEP to cover with every week, and are very high this week.

BCS SCHOOLS
07 -- All BCS teams covered by 5th week.
06 -- Stanford took 6 games to cover
05 -- Duke took 8 games to cover
04 -- Ole Miss and Clemson went 6 games, Washington State 11
03 -- All BCS teams covered by 5th week.

NON BCS SCHOOLS
07 -- Colorado State took 7 games
06 -- 3 teams took 6 weeks, Fresno 7th game, and Memphis 9th game.
05 -- Utah took 6 games, Rice 7
04 -- All covered in first 5
03 -- UCF took 7 games
 
just a warning ... check out wyomings current run vs the spread ... enough to make you never do a negative progression in cfb.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Br@ssknux
Week 5 Writeups and Hopefully Feedback
2
Replies
64
Views
2K
bones
bones
G-Man
***G-Man's College Week 3 -- Sept 12-14***
Replies
6
Views
330
G-Man
G-Man
B.A.R.
Week 3 B1G Thread...
Replies
27
Views
574
B.A.R.
B.A.R.
Br@ssknux
Week 3 Writeups and Hopefully Feedback
2
Replies
61
Views
2K
2daBank
2daBank
VirginiaCavs
Arizona vs. Utah Preview Article
Replies
3
Views
159
VirginiaCavs
VirginiaCavs
Back
Top