St. Bernadine Sports
Johnny Keelan
8:00pm - PLAY SMU +13.5 over Nevada; Public was hammering Nevada until injuries, suspensions and academics eliminated some of their key players. RB Taua for academics, RB Lippincott with turf toe, SS Williams just because he's stupid (was with Williams who was caught stealing) and Williams for stealing. With running back Taua and Lippincott taken out of the Nevada offence (over 2500 combined rushing yards) that changes Nevada's chances to cover a 13.5 spread. Nevada, stat and talent wise is superior to SMU, no doubt. But can they cover that 13.5 point spread without these players? SMU is a much improved team since the beginning of the year. (June Jones just won coach of the year in the NCAAF) Their QB is better, since changing their "D" to the 3-4 it has become better (although not great) and their running game is sound. Then we have some motivating factors or lack of that even makes this game a bit more complicated. Does Nevada even want to be there? We've seen in the previous bowl games the better team has not been winning, the more motivated team has been. Nevada's QB Kaepernick, this is his last game, he's devoting the rest of his college years to baseball, this a motivator or a deterrent? Kaepernick's ability to pass has been certainly been helped by their ability to run the ball. Nevada's been to Hawaii 5 times, motivator or not? SMU, 1st Bowl game in years. June June the stud of college coaches just being named coach of the year. Does he and his players allow the stud of coaching to get his balls whacked off in this game and become a gelding?
Here's what the computer (A.B.A.T.S.) had to say. Running the simulations before the loss of players and June Jones being named "Coach of the Year" the simulations showed Nevada winning 76% of the time with and average winning margin of 18.7 points per game. In running these simulations there was no adjustment to the motivation factor, input factor set at zero. Re-running the simulations with the loss of Nevada players and re-adjusting the motivation factor to a plus 3.5 (1-5 is the range) in favor of SMU, A.B.A.T.S. came up with a much different scenario. Nevada wins 54% of the time with an average winning margin of 5.2 points.
Johnny Keelan
8:00pm - PLAY SMU +13.5 over Nevada; Public was hammering Nevada until injuries, suspensions and academics eliminated some of their key players. RB Taua for academics, RB Lippincott with turf toe, SS Williams just because he's stupid (was with Williams who was caught stealing) and Williams for stealing. With running back Taua and Lippincott taken out of the Nevada offence (over 2500 combined rushing yards) that changes Nevada's chances to cover a 13.5 spread. Nevada, stat and talent wise is superior to SMU, no doubt. But can they cover that 13.5 point spread without these players? SMU is a much improved team since the beginning of the year. (June Jones just won coach of the year in the NCAAF) Their QB is better, since changing their "D" to the 3-4 it has become better (although not great) and their running game is sound. Then we have some motivating factors or lack of that even makes this game a bit more complicated. Does Nevada even want to be there? We've seen in the previous bowl games the better team has not been winning, the more motivated team has been. Nevada's QB Kaepernick, this is his last game, he's devoting the rest of his college years to baseball, this a motivator or a deterrent? Kaepernick's ability to pass has been certainly been helped by their ability to run the ball. Nevada's been to Hawaii 5 times, motivator or not? SMU, 1st Bowl game in years. June June the stud of college coaches just being named coach of the year. Does he and his players allow the stud of coaching to get his balls whacked off in this game and become a gelding?
Here's what the computer (A.B.A.T.S.) had to say. Running the simulations before the loss of players and June Jones being named "Coach of the Year" the simulations showed Nevada winning 76% of the time with and average winning margin of 18.7 points per game. In running these simulations there was no adjustment to the motivation factor, input factor set at zero. Re-running the simulations with the loss of Nevada players and re-adjusting the motivation factor to a plus 3.5 (1-5 is the range) in favor of SMU, A.B.A.T.S. came up with a much different scenario. Nevada wins 54% of the time with an average winning margin of 5.2 points.
