MAD WAGERIN', WEEK FOUR: READING IS FUNDAMENTAL
Resident probability technician Peter of Cleveland Frowns is a shade over .500 going into week four. Gambling, like reading, is fundamental, so work on your basics and enjoy this week's edition of Mad Wagering, and note that if/when the Pac-10 game comes to Las Vegas we will be the first ones there to "cover" the game.
It's Week Four, and it's hard to ask for a better start than the one we've gotten off to here so far: Our best foot forward with a perfect Week One slate (3-0-2), a most natural regression in Week Two (1-4), and a boldly benign Week Three (2-2-1). Remember, the season's opening weeks are for little more than ingratiating, so we're especially glad to be here in one whole piece even after making the obligatory opening offeratories (to The Stache and Sark), and indulging both our deep-seated prejudices (just see Week Two) and wildest fantasies (e.g., the Tebow Void).
Call this the beginning of 2010's Phase Two. Fall's in the air, and we've gotten somewhere.
And much better that we've gotten somewhere together. Let me explain.
Bill Simmons used to (and might still) complain about his early deadline for his weekly NFL picks column at ESPN, and it's easy to understand why. Because nobody ever really has to make a pick until kickoff, and of course, no game, (thus, no pick) is real until kickoff, that kickoff having been(,at least potentially, significantly) influenced by everything that happened in every bit of the time that came before it.
But the silver lining that Simmons always seemed to miss here is that those things that happen in that time between column deadline and kickoff include things like the responses to the picks that are published in the comment section by EDSBS readers. Which is to say how goddam right you are that I didn't put a full unit on Washington last week (word up/major thx Jimmyb2003, AutzenGetsBlounted, Joey C., and GoBigRev); and is also to point up what a good thing it can be when a person writes about why he picks what he picks with any kind of significant consistent effort.
Like, it's really not that hard for the decent reader to see where the decent writer goes off his course when it comes to these things (aka word up/major thx Jimmyb2003, AutzenGetsBlounted, Joey C., and GoBigRev). The difference between the winning plays -- the ones supported by irrefutable underappreciated analytical authority (Texas, Week Three), underappreciated historical fact (Miami, Week Two), and irrefutably moral morality (Boise, Week One; Arizona, Week Three) -- should be easy enough to distinguish from not just the prejudice and fantasy, but especially the raw derpery (like, "Hey, Mark Stoops prolly knows things about his brother Bob, and Christian Ponder DERP 7.5 SO MANY POINTZ WTFZ!?" (Florida State, Week Two (word up Temudjin here for the warning, btw)) or "Ya, the Huskers D is really good, but Sark, and frosh QB on road, and Locker might be underrateDDDDDERRRRRRP" (Washington, Week Three))."
So, you see, we're all in this together. Reading is fundamental. And people need people. Like I've been saying.
Just keep in mind that Phase Two is still at least somewhat about ingratiating. And also that I'm probably going to go undefeated this weekend, so don't get carried away.
Miami -4 over Pittsburgh (3 units) (Thursday, 7:50 PM ET, ESPN): Every once so rarely, a pick is really easy. No disrespect to the 'Stache (AT ALL, OBVS), but fuck the haters is the only thing that applies here.
*(Semi-relatedly: As much as I love Twitter, I'm fine with Randy Shannon's Twitter ban. Like when I was a Revere Football Minuteman ('96**), it was just one of those things that I wasn't allowed to smoke after-school blunts with Katie and Nate in Mrs. Harris's '84 Wagoneer while they drove in circles around the block laughing at us every day during practice. Sometimes you just have to make tradeoffs.)
**(Kicks!)
Alabama -7 over Arkansas (2 units) (Saturday, 3:35 PM ET, CBS): Way too much Ryan Mallett this week. Especially since if a Georgia DB would have played football even halfway right for one play and made a tackle, there really wouldn't have been any of it. Instead we'd be talking about all the dents Mallett made in the Georgia turf last week under where open receivers used to be. And that was flailing ailing Georgia last week, not Saban's fucking freakbots, who have us thinking about how hard it might not be to finish undefeated in the SEC. Against the spread.
Orson's great and all, and it's fine for him to write really nicely about how he wants there to be another great quarterback from the SEC (LIKE RITE NOWZ), but if Mallett's ever won one big game (questionable), he's for sure never won two big games in a row. Dan McGwire was 6'7" too.
Hair. Notice it. Thank you.
Finally, either semi-relatedly or probably most importantly, ESPN's resident wiseguy Chad Millman is telling us Arkansas is the play of the week because he knows some jerk who:
[L]ikes to go against teams in the second game of back-to-back road games when they have scored 50 or more in the previous game, are matched up against an opponent who did not score 50 and when the road team is not favored by more than 14 points.
Might as well crawl back into the muck and die instead of wagering on a football game for a reason like that.
Especially when there's this:
Notre Dame +5 over Stanford (3 units) (Saturday, 3:35 PM ET, NBC):
Andrew Luck's a different story. Number-one-pickworthy QBs from Stanford who have coaches for dads and otherwise just stink of football really do scare the fuck out of me. (He even has sort of an Elway face.)
But Luck and Stanford's offense can't be what's undervalued here (I see you, Dr. Sat.). At least not as much as Brian Kelly having gone Lloyd Bentzen on Coach Jim early this week. "I know Jack Harbaugh, son."
Snap.
What Kelly was probably getting at is that there's not a huge difference between what Stanford Football's slogan is ("What's your deal?") and what it probably should be ("We're kind of a bunch of dicks."). Plus, he's had a pretty strange go of it in his first three weeks as Irish coach what with the push in Purdue after Michael Floyd's weird punt, getting DERP Montana'd in Michigan after Dayne Crist's eyeballs got knocked loose, then having to go up to Sparta for even more weirdness after all that.
I like the potential that Notre Dame gets back to some normal this week at home coming off all that underrated weirdness against a potentially overbought Stanford attack. (It helps that Notre Dame's secondary is getting healthier while Stanford's receiving corps is moving in the opposite direction, too.)
Auburn --3 over South Carolina (3 units) (Saturday, 7:50 PM ET, ESPN): This one looks like it's going to be the game of the week. Like Iowa/Arizona last week, the toughest and most necessary pick on this week's slate. Think about it:
The first meaningful road game for the most hyped Sakerlina unit of the Spurrier Era. There's Auburn's brutal pass rush against Sakerlina's battered offensive line. And they say SEC home field is worth 5.5 points. But Carolina QB StephenGarcia is a junior now, with a running game behind him, and long fast receivers in front of him (this week against Auburn's smallish defensive backs).
And Auburn's offensive line might be in worse shape than the Cocks,' with one starting tackle (A.J. Greene) out, and another (Lee Zeimba) with a banged-up knee that reportedly "clearly" limited him last week." Worse for the Tigers that this exposes them to a Gamecock's strength in ends Devin Taylor and Cliff Matthews who should be able to limit inexperienced Auburn QB Cam Newton's seemingly necessary ability to move outside of the pocket.
In a way, it's too bad that it was only just last week that Auburn and Clemson played such a "game for grown men" (the only kind of game Cocaine Tiger plays, duh) while Sakerlina was pawing at Furman, but there has to be an upside for the Tigers in having survived that sort of thing too. What tips the scales for us here is the way they managed to do it. An entire first half of three-and-outs on offense plugged into Gus Malzahn at halftime for second half KILL. If life was like the movies and Cybertide was the Tin Man, it would shed a tear for this.*
*Just one.**
**Acid.
Boise State -17.5 over Oregon State (3 units) (Saturday, 8:05 PM ET, ABC): What a world for the Boise State Broncos, to get that Week One win only to have the vast right wing conspiracy so flagrantly cut them down the very next week. What's good about this for us and whoever else is Up with People is that there's only one natural response to this kind of treatment (and, relatedly, to flagrant violations of sound environmental policy), which is just KEEP COVERING BY ELEVENTY BILLION POINTS.
Plus, if Stanzi is President (he is*), Kellen Moore is VP.
*It takes a Maoist youth rally on Mars to even temporarily neutralize Stanzi's powers. Which is totally fair if someone can manage to organize the sort of thing.
----------
That's all for this week. If I was going to pick one more it would be West Virginia at LSU, which I might add to the slate later this week at Cleveland Frowns. Note that I'm 3-0 with picks that I've added to the slate later in the week this season, and again that your feedback on this week's action is not only appreciated but necessary.
(I'm 6-6-3 (-1 unit) picking this season against the spread so far here (and 9-6-3 counting the picks published at Frowns)).
**(Kicks!)
93 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Birmingham's Greek Festival is this weekend
Between souvlaki, hot loukomathes w/honey, and Auburn getting cornholed raw by USC, it should be great.
It's a sure sign of impending societal collapse when we have so many grown men sitting around and arguing on the Interwebz about other people they don't know playing games that don't matter. But it can occasionally be fun.
Racist?
WTH?? What sane person could possibly get anything remotely racial from my post? I hope it was a mispost.
It's a sure sign of impending societal collapse when we have so many grown men sitting around and arguing on the Interwebz about other people they don't know playing games that don't matter. But it can occasionally be fun.
by Dick H on Sep 23, 2010 5:22 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Can’t speak for sane persons but it was just a joke re: Greeks and raw cornholing. We’re cool.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Gotcha. It never occured to me that way.
I was thinking more along the lines of Auburn not being able to tackle Lattimore.
Does the -3 line vs SC not seem a bit optimistic given the fact that they only beat Miss. St. by 3? Are we saying that SC is approx. = Miss. St.?
It's a sure sign of impending societal collapse when we have so many grown men sitting around and arguing on the Interwebz about other people they don't know playing games that don't matter. But it can occasionally be fun.
Well they’re playing SC at home and Miss St on the road, so there’s at least a 3 point difference there. Plus, point spreads and results are two different things. You can’t just say “well they only beat Miss St. by 3 so they won’t beat Auburn by that many.” Or you could, but it would probably catch up to you pretty quickly.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 24, 2010 8:00 AM EDT up reply actions
Ummm...
Is Auburn -3 still as delicious as Auburn +3? The guy at the betting window laughed when I tried to put three units on Auburn +3.
They're -3
The new year approaching, click in. Let’s facelift bar! Open the wardrobe is not yet found love after another the right clothes? So, also waiting for? Immediate action bar!
THAT WAS A TEST.
Glad you fuckers can count, but if you could read you’d know that what the line is really doesn’t make a difference to me when I make my picks.
If it’s -3 that’s fine. Malzahn gives you all Fs.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions
I could understand why Auburn was getting 3 pts
In a parallel universe where SC had a talented senior QB named Matt Garcia.
But SC has a bi-polar junior QB named Stephen Garcia, who is mentored by Mini-Matthew McConoughey. I can understand why SC is getting the points.
And since Garcia's a junior...
I was righter than I thought about this pick. Nice. Stupid fucking juniors.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions
i do b'lee
that the “Matt Garcia” is a play on exactly what you just mentioned. Mini-Matthew Mc = Matt; Stephen Garcia = Garcia:: Matt Garcia is who we thought he was. /Denny Green’d
but, i could be completely wrong….
MSState Football: You want INT's? We got 'em.
by CoastalCowbell on Sep 23, 2010 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Revere Minuteman?
Ok – total off topic. I went to Revere Middle School, moved to vegas in ’90. Would have been class of ’95.
the internets is a small friggin world, man.
And getting smaller every minute.
Word up. If you’re going to move anywhere, too. Well played. Email me if you want to know where anyone is, etc.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions
much appreciated, but with the creation of Facebook I’m able to stalk… er, reconnect with…all the 7th graders that I remember from back in the day.
Bathcrest used to be the set I rolled from. No really. I used to ride my bike all over the place.
/shout out to Montrose and Fairlawn
by vegas_buckeye on Sep 24, 2010 1:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Ah, Bathcrest. The liberal stronghold of Bath; it’s only neighborhood with sidewalks. So you probably remember when Montrose was just the grocery store (Click’s), the drive in theater, McDonald’s, and The Freeze (the ice cream joint). Have you seen it lately? You really wouldn’t believe.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 24, 2010 8:05 AM EDT up reply actions
hey peter:
last week, i thought the lock was to take iowa. i saw them as overwhelming favorites (big ten bias, i guess. or getting routinely stomped by iowa. whichever).
because of your advice, i did not wager the massive units i had ready on that game. and i am forever grateful.
i got boise and miami this week as well, and am staying the hell away from the ND game. Any game with ND causes me to bet out of spite.
Eat what the monkey eats, then eat the monkey. -U.S. Navy survival guidance
I might need to save this comment for a headstone if you're OK w/ that.
Word up either way, tho. Any thoughts on PSU/Temple? I’m sort of wanting to take Al Golden here because I think he has this potentially legit “I should be the boss in Happy Valley” thing going on. Also, under oath, I watched every second of the Eagle Bank Bowl last season. Temple obviously would have smashed there if there weren’t higher-order principles that applied.
I nailed this one … http://www.clevelandfrowns.com/2009/12/bowling-for-dollars-owls-and-bears-at.html
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions
psu -14?
stay away. i just don’t know what psu has at this point. they can move the ball, but has been on the bad end of turnovers this season. unsettling trend. feels like a 24-3 game in the 4th when temple rolls in a garbage td.
Eat what the monkey eats, then eat the monkey. -U.S. Navy survival guidance
Right, I was thinking of going with Temple.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 24, 2010 8:06 AM EDT up reply actions
Considering I was nervous about last week,
I don’t know if you can lump me in with the other commenters on UW-Nebraska. I admittedly took my boys, but a) Monopoly money and b) homerism gets a pass when it comes to the Huskers. Maybe it’s residual paranoia from the Callahan regime, but I still expect my Huskers to lose one charlie foxtrot game this year.
On Stanford: I think their motto should be “Fuck yes, we’re dicks – get used to it. Furthermore, what’s your fucking deal?” I think I’m taking Stanford, though, and if it’s out of spite, well, picking Stanford apparently puts me in good company there.
"...when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to."
— Martin Luther
You know, Rev, I was gonna add a footnote specifically re: you...
because while you hedged with your words, the images you posted far outweighed that.
Great point re: Stanford’s motto, but betting WITH them out of spite is probably like crossing streams or shutting down the flux capacitor or something. Some DBDoug threat level 6 shit.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions
You put units down based on Pelini's resemblance to a Rancor?
To quote a certain Alderaanian princess, “You’re braver than I thought.”
"...when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to."
— Martin Luther
Harbaugh is just the kind of dick to use a mere 5 point spread as bulletin board material.
I would love to play for that man.
It's pretty obvious to me what Notre Dame's game plan has to be here.
The cruisers will create a perimeter while the fighters pry into the superstructure and knock out the main reactor.
/loses by a field goal
//ginbottletolipsglugglugglug
It's Stanford week. Ask me a question about Stanford.
by Ancient Chinese Secret on Sep 23, 2010 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Total reversal in my reality.
Darth Kelly has the new battle station on its way to Alderaan/Palo Alto as we speak.
You, of course, are the junior officer who realizes you’re supporting a Galactic Empire which was once impressive, but now has become hollow and corrupt.
And just remember: Han Solo started out as a TIE pilot.
/nerd’d
"...when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to."
— Martin Luther
by Go Big Rev on Sep 23, 2010 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Evacuate to the liquor store? At our moment of triumph?
I think you overestimate their chances.
/winning touchdown by Stanford
All right, let’s go. Who’s got cash?
It's Stanford week. Ask me a question about Stanford.
by Ancient Chinese Secret on Sep 23, 2010 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
I just wanted to be dismissive toward UW
Either way, Peter’s tendency to embrace the picks that didn’t turn out great (rather than complaining about the goddamn QB injury/goddamn missed field goal/goddamn [NAME REDACTED]) is quite refreshing.
"I've made a huge little mistake." - G.O.B.
Money lines I like
I love the money line bets. It’s like buying out of money option calls. And for clarification I bet 2 units taking the points and 1 unit on the money line
Temple +14 against Penn State
NC State +8 against Ga Tech
Cal +7 against Arizone (bounce back game with an extra day of prep versus historic victory
Dogs I like but not enough to take the money line
FIU +12 against Maryland
MiaOhio +20 against Mizzou
Jinx re: Temple
This could be a good one. Does anyone have anything to add on this?
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, I'll add something
Taking the moneyline on Temple in this game is batshit insane (This applies as long as we’re talking real money and not hypothetical, I-would’ve-made-coin-if-I-made-that-call money or putting-them-down-in-your-weekly-pick-em money).
Spread looks like money, though. I also like the Cal moneyline, so maybe I’m only a few steps away from batshit insanity.
by ramblingamblinjohn on Sep 23, 2010 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions
I think you are overthinking the Cal-Zona game a bit
I get that Arizona is coming off a big win, and Cal is coming off a loss, but how does that equal a Cal win? Seems like faulty regression to the mean thinking. To me, I see an Arizona team that beat a good Iowa team, and a Cal team that got stomped by Nevada. Nevada is good, but Arizona may be better. I’m probably staying away, but I’d go Arizona to cover if I had to choose.
Arizona is most definitely better than Nevada when you consider the Pack's defense
The question is whether or not this is the week that California gets all 3 Triforces together and finally plays a complete game of football. It only happens once or twice every year and it always leads to blowing the doors off some unsuspecting team with more talent.
"I've made a huge little mistake." - G.O.B.
Don't know what people see in Temple
They barely scraped by Villanova and Central Michigan, and now they are going to win outright vs Penn State? I just don’t see it. I may be able to be talked in Temple plus the 14, but only because Penn State’s offense might not be good enough to score enough to cover.
Thumbs up to adding West Virginia
I’m also on Boise. It’s scary that I’m in sync with you this week. No offense (but really, offense).
by ramblingamblinjohn on Sep 23, 2010 3:55 PM EDT reply actions
So you like West VIrginia and the points?
I think I do too.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 7:11 PM EDT up reply actions
can someone explain
the Units? what do you mean for instance, for the Miami/Pitt game when you say 3 units?
Tonight, tonight the strip's just right,
I wanna blow 'em all out of their seats.
We're callin' out around the world, we're going racin' in the street.
-the Boss
by diego tutweiler on Sep 23, 2010 4:00 PM EDT reply actions
as in how much you are willing to lose during the season?
Tonight, tonight the strip's just right,
I wanna blow 'em all out of their seats.
We're callin' out around the world, we're going racin' in the street.
-the Boss
by diego tutweiler on Sep 23, 2010 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Units, Shmunits
Go with your gut, brah.
I would not join any club that would have someone like me for a member. -Groucho Marx
by Uncle Earmuffs on Sep 23, 2010 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions
I meant exacty re:
a unit being how much you are willing to lose during the season. But also go with your gut.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Hehe…snuck that in there on ya on accident, sorry
I would not join any club that would have someone like me for a member. -Groucho Marx
by Uncle Earmuffs on Sep 23, 2010 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions
I was with you for Miami and Bama
But the train derailed at ND/Stanford. ND hasn’t shown anything that says they can hang with this Stanford team, and 5 points is not nearly enough. Auburn played awful vs a Clemson team that I don’t think is even that good. If they play like that vs SC, the defense is not going to let them back in the game. As for Boise, it may just be wishful thinking, but I think the game is going to be close.
Oh, I don't know.
I’m pretty confident that ND can trade touchdowns with Stanford before losing in most freakish fashion by .00000000000001 points with one yoctosecond remaining on the play clock.
It's Stanford week. Ask me a question about Stanford.
by Ancient Chinese Secret on Sep 23, 2010 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions
ND has shown
that it might be able to light up this Stanford D and hang in a shootout.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Cuz they put up all those points...
against Purdue, Michigan, and Michigan St? I know that Crist was out for part of the Michigan game, but still. Stanford blanked UCLA and hasn’t scored less than 35 all season, and ND hasn’t scored more than 31. I guess I’m just not seeing it. But, ND will prob come out and score 50 or something now, just to spite me.
Teams that gain a lot of yards but fail to score in the red zone
Tend to get better at sticking it in there (that’s what she said). They had 461 and 535 against Mich St. and Michigan, which is pretty dirty. That said, I wouldn’t touch this game with a 10 foot pole with a Magnum and spermicidal lube.
The new year approaching, click in. Let’s facelift bar! Open the wardrobe is not yet found love after another the right clothes? So, also waiting for? Immediate action bar!
Good point, and I don't think there's much reason to think that Stanford's defense
is that much better than Purdue’s or Michigan State’s. Also, Crist missed half the Michigan game. Also, what’s blanking UCLA supposed to mean to us?
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 24, 2010 8:10 AM EDT up reply actions
Comic relief, of course.
"...when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to."
— Martin Luther
I'm not saying they are going to blank ND
because they did it to UCLA. But shutting out anyone and holding them to under 250 yards is still something that can’t be ignored. I do see this being a bit of a shootout and ND getting some points, but I still see Stanford winning 45-31 or something. I just don’t see ND’s defense stopping Stanford when they really need to late in the game.
Why waste a bet on the Auburn/SC game?
Just seems like there’s too much going on in that one for me to feel confident one way or the other. We know Clemson had shit for WRs and that is USC strength. Also, there’s no data that would indicate Clemson’s RBs or OL are not as good or better than Clemson’s.
Also, does no one like UGA +1 against Miss St?? When is the last time UGA starting out 0-3 in the SEC? Ever?? Plus, Miss St. is being overvalued for hanging close with a decent Auburn team and getting trounced by an even worse LSU team.
With you on UGA +1
I really like what Dan Mullen is doing at Miss St, but I just can’t see UGA starting 0-3 either.
I'm leaning the other way
Miss State lost to LSU, but moved the ball before throwing 5 picks. UGA’s run defense is such that MSU won’t need to pass more than a handful of times. Problem solved.
This isn’t a UGA defense that can flip the switch. Their gameplan against SC consisted of standing around and looking confused as Lattimore ran them over. This could be Mullen’s coming out party (and Richt’s funeral).
Still probably not going to play it, though, because I can’t see UGA 0-3 either.
by ramblingamblinjohn on Sep 23, 2010 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Why can't anybody see UGA 0-3?
Seems like potentially exploitable reasoning there.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Because then Mark Richt will either be forced to fire a coordinator, or get canned..
himself for not firing someone…this is their worst start in forever and they played well enough to have won the Ark. game on offense, not on defense, and that is where they supposedly improved a little this year. Plus, it will make Paul Finebaum look like a genius fortune teller for all his offseason distain for Mark Richt and Georgia fans, wondering outloud “why in the hell do you fans put up with Mark Richt?”
I felt they should have won both South Carolina and Arkansas if the Defense would have learned how to tackle….thats just basic stuff, forget about the AJ Green thing. Their defense is what sucks.
Most Alabama fans believe the Tide will never lose another game between now and the end of time. I have no evidence before me to suggest that they are wrong.--Dawg Sports
by mrpelicanpants on Sep 23, 2010 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Sounds like
those could be more reasons why we ought to be able to see UGA 0-3. But keep in mind that I’m not all that familiar with Paul Finebaum’s work. So now that I google him I think I remember his face on one of Doug’s 50 most loathsome entries. I dunno. Sometimes jerks are right about things. But even if he’s not, they might still go 0-3. Just saying.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions
What offense does Miss. St. have exactly? UGA got torched by Lattimore (an elite player) and Ryan Mallet (an elite player). Jerious Norwood is not walking through that door…
Redshirt Frosh on the road for UGA might concern you, but Aaron Murray is proving that he’s got stones and can play with the big boys. This kid is legit. He has been the least of our concerns thus far.
Predicition: UGA looks like shit in the first half with something like a 3-3 game at the half, but talent and depth win out in the second half for an ugly 16-6 win.
by get swoll yunel on Sep 24, 2010 1:01 AM EDT up reply actions
Those 5 picks Miss St threw aren’t an accident or a random card drawn (“You Have Thrown an INT, move back 3 spaces!”) They came because the QB’s aren’t that good. Plus, for as bad as UGA’s defense was vs SC, they still only gave up 17 points. They gave up a ton of yards to Lattimore and Mallett, but like the person said above, Miss St doesn’t have a Lattimore or a Mallet.
Hey look!
A Tech guy who thinks UGA is gonna suck and that Richt (career record vs Tech: 8-1) might be gone soon!
Totally surprised!
by get swoll yunel on Sep 24, 2010 12:54 AM EDT up reply actions
Uh, no edit.
I meant there’s no indication from anywhere I’ve read that Clemson’s RBs and OL are better than South Carolina’s. I think South Carolina will have just as much success running the football as Clemson did and will have more success throwing the ball. That equals tough sledding for Auburn.
Agree with you on both
There are just too many damn variables in the SC/AU game, at least on the SC side.
Death of Starting OLinemans father, murder of CC Whitlock’s brother, and the suicide of Kenny McKinley mean the emotional status of the Gamecocks will be difficult to gauge. They could come out focused and play out of their minds winning by multiple TD’s; or could just as easily come out flat and get blown out. My heart tells me SC wins it, but I’m staying away.
That UGA team is way over-sold. I’m all over that game. They might not have much defense, but Miss St. has yet to show any offense.
by BrisketBiscuit on Sep 23, 2010 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed on both
Weird emotional crap on the SC side, plus the fact that they’re SC, versus the fact that Auburn played a knife-fight of a game last weekend. Stay away!
I said this was the hardest one to pick...
but my system requires playing the most interesting games. It pays off at the end.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions
It's about a process, not putting everything you have on one pick.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm going with SC....emotional stuff aside, kids are resilent, plus...
for the first time in a long time, Spurrier has some sort of real running game that takes the pressure off of Garcia, and he can be a half-way decent game manager, like Rex Grossman….with less common sense and more daring.
Most Alabama fans believe the Tide will never lose another game between now and the end of time. I have no evidence before me to suggest that they are wrong.--Dawg Sports
by mrpelicanpants on Sep 23, 2010 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions
plus Auburn is beat the hell up....
Most Alabama fans believe the Tide will never lose another game between now and the end of time. I have no evidence before me to suggest that they are wrong.--Dawg Sports
by mrpelicanpants on Sep 23, 2010 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I will agree that it's more fun to bet on games that are:
a) interesting and b) on TV. It sucks to bet big bucks on Ball State vs. Western Michigan even if it’s the “better” bet.
Right. Otherwise you end up down a slippery slope that ends with you betting on teams because of things like that “teams in the second game of back-to-back road games when they have scored 50 or more in the previous game, are matched up against an opponent who did not score 50 and when the road team is not favored by more than 14 points” are X-Y-and-Z against the spread over the last 30 yrs.
Which isn’t to say there’s not a use for the sort of thing. It’s just a completely different thing.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 5:56 PM EDT up reply actions
The ability to stay interested in this topic must come from the Y chromosome.
by zzgator on Sep 23, 2010 4:14 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
It's about math, you wouldn't understand
I keed, I keed. It’s about thinking you are smarter than you really are. And that certainly is a Y chromosome trait.
I'll have you know I got the highest score on the 8th grade math talent test...
sponsored by Pepsi™. TAKE THAT ALL YOU PRE-PUBESCENT BOYS!
I agree with the rest of your thinking though.
Over/Unders I like
Oregon @ ASU: Over 56.5 (got this at 54) – This is FREE money
Stanford @ Notre Dame: Over 59
Oregon State @ Boise St.: Over 56.5
Bowling Green @ Michigan: Over 58.5 (Who needs D?)
NMSU @ KU: Under 50.5 (another 6 – 3 barnburner?)
I don't know how you could take the SC-Aub game with this at QB for the cocks

Oh, and @OleMiss_Ackbar confirmed for me that UF-UK is indeed a trap. Bet accordingly.
Weoejuwejhdjwe!
by Chekhov's Spread Gun Option on Sep 23, 2010 5:49 PM EDT reply actions
So this must be the elusive Matt Garcia. Interesting.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 23, 2010 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm putting an eleventh hour wager on Miami to cover big.
I sense much Wannstache tonight.

It's Stanford week. Ask me a question about Stanford.
by Ancient Chinese Secret on Sep 23, 2010 5:57 PM EDT reply actions
You are wise in the ways of the Stache, young padawan.
"...when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to."
— Martin Luther
hmmm
Read it three times and still can not quite grasp whether you are picking on my comments or they are truly appreciated. That being said I am going to comment anyway on your picks.
The only one for obvious homer reasons that I do not like is the Arkansas game and I got a few reasons. Home team, line is absurdly low, and third I will have my happy ass in the seat to watch and would prefer it be a drinking celebration not a drinking to forget type of event. After looking at everything I believe there are two possible outcomes a dominant alabama win 20 or more and then there is the Arkansas outright win.
Go Hogs
They are truly appreciated.
Really. I appreciate it when you’re right about shit, and you try to tell me. Like Gwinnett right below here, for instance.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 24, 2010 8:14 AM EDT up reply actions
To repeat what several have said, stay away from South Carolina-Auburn.
Not only are there better plays, but there are probably better plays on TV.
If you must play it, I will tell you the same thing I said with South Carolina-Georgia: take Carolina. The O-linemen were all practicing at full strength today, and Shaq WIlson is starting at LB for the first time all season. Auburn is legitimately banged up, and I saw nothing to convince me that they can consistently run the ball on our D. I like our chances if Newton has to make plays against our secondary. The Plainsmen will not be able to get drug up and down the field for a half, then count on outcoaching the opposition in the second.
"They've just discovered a new use for sheep over there at Clemson... wool." - Lewis Grizzard
by GwinnettGamecock on Sep 24, 2010 1:17 AM EDT reply actions
Thanks. If there’s one I’ll back off on here it will be this one.
by Cleveland Frowns on Sep 24, 2010 8:17 AM EDT up reply actions
That Stanford-ND line just doesn't seem right to me
I know they’re on the road, but I don’t think that ND can stay within 10 of Stanford. They’re a more well rounded team than they get credit for.
I also think OSU can stay within 17 of BSU, although BSU does always just seem to make it happen, so I’d just avoid that game if I actually had money to bet.
Couldn’t agree more with SeattleDucks, an Oregon over set at 56 is a great bet, unless there’s some sort of We Are Oregon situation. All hail Uncle Phil!

by AutzenGetsBlounted on Sep 24, 2010 4:26 PM EDT reply actions





















