for some football? Two plays for opening night:
Stanford +3 -107 (Matchbook), 1.07 units to win 1 unit
I'm not sure where all the public interest in Oregon State is coming from, except for their 9-4 record last year. Lame QB and they only return 3 starters on defense (lost all of the front 7). Stanford returns 16 starters from last year's team which showed real potential in a couple of big upsets. 64% of wagerline on Oregon State, but the line has moved from -4 back to -3. A good sign for us.
Baylor +11.5 -110 (WSEX), 1.10 units to win 1 unit
Purely a play on the public betting (68% on Wake) and the line move (from -13 back to -11 at most places now).
Lean to UTEP also, but haven't pulled the trigger yet. The Under in the South Carolina looks too good to be true. Good luck everybody.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Baylor +11.5? You cant just play against the public w/o factoring in fundamental matchups - like Baylor doesnt have a QB and they are installing a new system that Briles ran at Houston........Im on WF and I'll probably lose since Im spouting off on your pick but its either WF or nothing.......I wouldnt play Baylor with your money....
At least if you were playing with our money, you couldn't lose very much.....
Playing against the public is almost always going to require some leap of faith, since by definition it requires you to buck conventional wisdom. This is as good as spot as any- true, Baylor has a new coach, but Briles has gotten universal praise from those in the know, and the fact that he's making his debut at home on a Thursday night against a top-25 team will almost certianly lead to a better-than-normal atmosphere in Waco tonight. And Wake has some adapting to do as well- they've got a new DC. Put it all together and I think there's value. It's not a lock, but nothing ever is.
I'm not sure I agree with the QB criticism, either. Looks to me like they've got junior who put up respectable numbers last year (respectable when you consider the rest of the team's struggles, certainly) who's being pushed by a highly touted frosh. There's no Chase Daniel there, agreed, but I think saying they "don't have a QB" might be a bit much.
I can't believe I wrote all that and didn't make a single Branch Davidian crack.
The frosh QB had moments of great athleticism but when you go all camp and cant name a starter, you essentially dont have a QB......Plus these guys are in a new system - my point was that there are better games this weekend to fade the public.....I normally agree with your baseball plays - I normally play all dogs my self and like to play dogs in football but sometimes, it is what it is, and the game plays out like you handicap..I enjoy the site - no disrepect intended fellas.
No problem, Steve, nice win. The main reason for doing this blog is to get input from other folks to try and learn how to do this better. Sometimes, those anti-public plays can be just a little bit too "cute" as I used to call them in the e-mail conversations that led to creating this blog. Any advice or information you have is always appreciated. Thanks.
Post a Comment