arty:
Hey VOR,
Good to see you rollin. I swear, everytime I look at you, pags and Gyno's plays, it's always identical. Do you guys pm or talk on the phone. I was just across the street and saw the iowa, NCST, Louisville play on those guys lists. I'm w/u guys on them. I'm glad my list is matching w/you guys. GL buddy.
as always... aloha.
Your quite right we talk often. While this is my first full year wagering CFB hes got over 20 years under his belt. I've brought my percentage, value, situation spot, and match up style from the NFL into this sport while Pags brings his countless hours of research and other savvy capping skills to the table. Also if you take a look Go Sooners and I usually end up with a considerable amount of similar plays (I recall at least 8 games 2 weeks ago). Bottom line myself, Pags, Gyno and GoSooners seem to always be on the same page in most cases. The only big difference is that I end up playing almost half the board (I played 10 NFL games this week alone) :drink:
2* Okie St. +4 (2* above +3, 1.25* at 3, .50* below 3)
2* FSU -6 (1* at -7, .5* above -7)
2* Nebraska +3 (1.5* below +3)
1.5* Iowa +8 (.75* at 7, no play below 7)
1* N.C. St +5.5 (.5* at +3.5 or higher, no play at +3)
1* Cinci +8.5 (no play under 7, .5* at +7)
.5* TCU -1 (would play up to -2.5)
.5* Oregon -12 (no play at 14 or higher)
.5* UNC -2.5 (no play above 3)
.25* Notre Dame +3.5
.25* Louisville +7 -120
.25* Louisville +7
.15* UCLA +7 (might add)
.15* OKL -25
2* FSU -6 (1* at -7, .5* above -7)
2* Nebraska +3 (1.5* below +3)
1.5* Iowa +8 (.75* at 7, no play below 7)
1* N.C. St +5.5 (.5* at +3.5 or higher, no play at +3)
1* Cinci +8.5 (no play under 7, .5* at +7)
.5* TCU -1 (would play up to -2.5)
.5* Oregon -12 (no play at 14 or higher)
.5* UNC -2.5 (no play above 3)
.25* Notre Dame +3.5
.25* Louisville +7 -120
.25* Louisville +7
.15* UCLA +7 (might add)
.15* OKL -25
I see that you like to play a lot of games. Did u ever think bout just hitting up the best bets? Or are u one of those guys that likes the action? 4 myself, I just try 2 bet the least amount of bets possible. I guess my philosophy is... bet more, lose more. But i've only been doing NCAAF for 2 years now. Getting better n more disciplined every year. Thanks to guys like u, Pags, Tool, Gyno, Randizzle. All good bros.
As always... aloha.
BOL, I like them all but Iowa...If PSU had not had the bye last week I could see this play, but not now. PSU shut down the Ohio ST. Run and I think they can do the same here with an extra week to prepare. I worry that Iowa cannot stop PSU through the air...I'm passing on that one but will be on the rest.
BOL
BOL
Guys, please give me some better reasons for Iowa to cover against PSU. Good running game and good run D don't cut it since PSU is better in both categories. Home field is honestly the only thing Iowa has in this matchup and IMO, once PSU jumps out early the fans (and I will be one of them) will be a non factor. As a Hawkeye, I see absolutely no way they cover this game. I thought for sure the line would come out around 13 and would even think of taking PSU at 17. The Hawks have won 5 games...none against a team that has a .500 record. In fact, of the 4 wins they have against DI schools their records are a combined 12-23.
Now I know people are gonna say they are 12 points away from undefeated blah blah blah. And we are talking about NW, MSU, Illini, and Pitt...not exactly your top tiered teams. Did you watch those games? If you did, you will realize that in every case they were the 2nd best team on the field and deserved to lose (maybe the NW game could hold a good argument since they did turn the ball over 4 times to NW's 0 and a couple were not forced).
What scares me is their running game was slowed down by Illinois last week who gave up 138 yds on the ground when they normally give up 150. Iowa usually rushes for 190/g. Iowa was coming off an idle week and still couldn't run against the 9th best run defense in the conference (74th in the nation). Is this a sign teams have figured out that you can play 8-9 in the box, play man on the outside and force Stanzi and his slow WR's to beat you??? Don't even tell me they were looking ahead to PSU either...The Hawks were 2-2 in the Big 10 and Illinois was 2-3.
Aside from the Wisconsin and Indiana game (FIU and Maine don't count) the Hawks have looked extremely average. If not for Greene and their DL play, they would look awful. And I'll give Wiscy the benefit of the doubt since they were coming off a heart breaking loss at Michigan, a tough loss at home vs. Ohio St and a drubbing by the Nitany Lions only to have to go on the road (extremely banged up) to face an Iowa team that was chomping at the bit.
The Hawks have yet to run into a balanced attack like PSU's and have yet to face a QB that can win the game if the Hawks do shut down the run. As erratic as Juice Williams is, he pretty much did that and if his WR's could hang onto a ball the score would have been much worse. Let me tell you this....Juice is no Daryll Clark and the Illini are no Spread HD!
The Nitany Lions have been tested on the road and while Kinnick is a tough place to play, I don't think it compares to The Shoe at night. I love the Hawks and hope I'm dead wrong about this game, but in all honesty don't see them staying within 2 TD's even at home. PSU 38 Iowa 21
Now I know people are gonna say they are 12 points away from undefeated blah blah blah. And we are talking about NW, MSU, Illini, and Pitt...not exactly your top tiered teams. Did you watch those games? If you did, you will realize that in every case they were the 2nd best team on the field and deserved to lose (maybe the NW game could hold a good argument since they did turn the ball over 4 times to NW's 0 and a couple were not forced).
What scares me is their running game was slowed down by Illinois last week who gave up 138 yds on the ground when they normally give up 150. Iowa usually rushes for 190/g. Iowa was coming off an idle week and still couldn't run against the 9th best run defense in the conference (74th in the nation). Is this a sign teams have figured out that you can play 8-9 in the box, play man on the outside and force Stanzi and his slow WR's to beat you??? Don't even tell me they were looking ahead to PSU either...The Hawks were 2-2 in the Big 10 and Illinois was 2-3.
Aside from the Wisconsin and Indiana game (FIU and Maine don't count) the Hawks have looked extremely average. If not for Greene and their DL play, they would look awful. And I'll give Wiscy the benefit of the doubt since they were coming off a heart breaking loss at Michigan, a tough loss at home vs. Ohio St and a drubbing by the Nitany Lions only to have to go on the road (extremely banged up) to face an Iowa team that was chomping at the bit.
The Hawks have yet to run into a balanced attack like PSU's and have yet to face a QB that can win the game if the Hawks do shut down the run. As erratic as Juice Williams is, he pretty much did that and if his WR's could hang onto a ball the score would have been much worse. Let me tell you this....Juice is no Daryll Clark and the Illini are no Spread HD!
The Nitany Lions have been tested on the road and while Kinnick is a tough place to play, I don't think it compares to The Shoe at night. I love the Hawks and hope I'm dead wrong about this game, but in all honesty don't see them staying within 2 TD's even at home. PSU 38 Iowa 21
Actually I have about an equal level of success this year hitting plays under 1 unit than those at and above 1 unit. In week 2 for example my smaller plays went 8-2 while going 2-2 on my bigger plays. In week 4 again I went 3-7 on my bigger plays while going 13-9 on the smaller ones. My worst week with plays under 1 unit was Week 8 in which I went 5-5. So in all honestly I actually feel more confident than ever that I need to put trust in my system no matter how many plays it calls for. Pags, BoxSlayer, and many others like yourself will make a good cases for making less plays and even though I concur with that philosophy to great extent I can't find a reason to change what I'm doing. Trust me if my system at any point shows any consistency of losing with my smaller plays then I'll be the first to pull the plug. For that to happen I'll have to see conclusive evidence of failure (10 weeks or so). For now things seem just peachy
I have the same concerns you do I just A) saw value with the line B) Well coached team at home getting more than a touchdown C) A team physically strong up front on both sides of the football (something I always like putting my money on) D) I had the game circled for about 6 weeks
I've been wrong 83 times so this could always be number 84 :drink:
