College Football Gambling: Northwestern suffers multiple key injuries | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Syracuse at Northwestern Northwestern hammered by a rash of injuries following Week 1's win at Cal. The Wildcats lost starting cornerback Daniel Jones to a torn ACL. Running back Venric Mark, who led the team in rushing last season, is dealing with an ankle injury. And starting quarterback Kain Colter is doubtful with a shoulder injury. No line on the game offshore. Las Vegas' Wynn opened Northwestern -9.5 with the current number -10.5 according to Sports Options. Tags: College Football Northwestern Wildcats Big Ten Syracuse Orange ACC | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
College Football Betting Preview: Notre Dame Fighting Irish at Michigan Wolverines | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Submitted by Otto SportsNotre Dame at Michigan? Saturday, 5 pm PT - ESPN? CRIS Opener: Michigan -4 O/U 51? CRIS Current: Michigan -3.5 O/U 52? Rob Veno's Power Rating: Michigan -5? Marty Otto's Recommendation: See analysis Notre Dame and Michigan meet in the Big House on Saturday night with ESPN providing the coverage. This is a rare night game in Ann Arbor and you can be certain a rabid crowd of well over 100,000 fans will be yelling as loud as they can. There has been a little media battle going on about the importance, or significance, of this rivalry; Brian Kelly doesn?t believe it?s that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things that Notre Dame will not be renewing the series for the foreseeable future. Brady Hoke thinks it is a big deal to Michigan and called ND ?chickens? for ending the head-to-head plans. It clearly adds just a little more spice to this matchup. Coaching? Hoke has followed a somewhat similar career trajectory; a strong background in the MAC eventually led him here to Ann Arbor. He has a BCS bowl appearance to his credit. He?s also trying to change the philosophies a little bit after the Rich Rodriguez era, adding an element of grit I think was lacking. ND Offense vs. Michigan Defense? The Wolverines went from soft and underdeveloped as a defense under Rich-Rod to tough under Hoke almost instantly. He talks about wanting to ?hear football? and it starts up front with a banging defensive line. This was a team that was solid against the run last year and while some new faces are breaking into the starting 11 I think they?ll continue an upward trajectory. One thing defensive coordinator Greg Mattison wanted to see from his team was a better pass rush without having to blitz and we?ll get a good indication this weekend whether he?s got the guys to do it right now. ND Defense vs. Michigan Offense? Michigan begins what they hope is a new era of offensive philosophy in 2013. No more Denard Robinson, no more spread and zone read option. Al Borges and Hoke are implementing a downhill, pro style, rushing focused, aggressive offense this year. Devin Gardner is firmly entrenched as the starting quarterback and has a chance to be a very solid Big Ten caliber signal caller. He is much more of a pocket pass than Robinson ever was but still has the athletic ability to get out and make things happen with his legs. But make no mistake; the days of Michigan quarterbacks leading the team in rushing are likely over. Look for Fitz Toussaint and highly touted Derrick Green to pound the rock a lot this season. This is without question the matchup of the day. Michigan?s pro style offense and rushing focus against an outstanding Notre Dame defensive line. Final Take? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sports Betting Podcast 9-3-2013 with Handicappers Brian Edwards and Ian Cameron | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tags: College Football Brian Edwards Ian Cameron | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NFL Handicapping: Washington's Griffin ready to go for Week 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Philadelphia at Washington -3.5 O/U 51.5 Not surprising but Washington announced that Robert Griffin III will start Monday's Week 1 game against Philadelphia. The Redskins went 4-0 SU/ATS during the preseason despite Griffin's absence. "If we didn't feel Robert was full-go and ready to play and do all the things you ask a guy to do, he would not be playing in this game," Shanahan said. "If that's sprinting out, if it's running the option, if it's drop back, he can do all those things because he proved it to us in practice." ?Tags: NFL Washington Redskins Philadelphia Eagles | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NFL Betting Update: Sources say Oakland's Pryor will start Week 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Oakland at Indianapolis -9.5 O/U 47 It's official (somewhat): the Oakland Raiders will start Terrelle Pryor for Week 1's game at Indianapolis. During the preseason, Oakland's offense was significantly better (by their standards) with Pryor under center.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NFL Betting Trends: Week 1 Thursday stand-alone home teams | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Solid trend here with NFL home teams playing Week 1 Thursday stand-alone games currently 9-1 SU, 6-2-2 ATS. The Denver Broncos obviously fit the profile for Thursday's game against the Baltimore Ravens.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NFL Gambling Trends: Week 1 Playoff Revenge | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Note a huge sample but here are the betting results for NFL Week 1 playoff revenge. Since 2002, teams seeking revenge went 3-6 SU and 4-4-1 ATS. Denver lost to Baltimore 38-35 (OT) as 9.5-point favorites while Green Bay lost to San Francisco 45-31 as 3-point underdogs.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
College Football Betting Recap: Winston wows in Florida State's blowout win over Pitt | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Submitted by Stat Intelligence A lot of people knew that before tonight?s Florida State/Pittsburgh game that was nationally televised by ESPN. Now, everybody knows. If you didn?t watch the game, and are reading this late Monday or during the day Tuesday?you?re probably thinking all the hype you?ve been reading and hearing about redshirt freshman quarterback Jameis Winston?s passing performance is a bit overwrought. It may not be. He passed the eye test right away?getting zip on his passes and throwing accurately downfield. This is something that really jumps out at people who watched a zillion college football games the past weekend. Zip and accuracy on passes more than 15 yards downfield comes and goes at this level (if the zip is even there in the first place). The eye test was followed by the stat test: 25-27-0-356 with 4 TD passes Goodness. It was both electric and methodical. He just marched the Seminoles down the field by hitting receivers between the numbers. These weren?t dinks and dunks. This wasn?t spreading everyone out then flaring one out to a wide open running back on a swing pass in a way that padded the stats in the extreme. That was about as ?for real? as it gets. It?s only one game. Maybe Pittsburgh?s pass defense was much worse than realized. Maybe there will be a letdown in coming weeks?or a few flat spots where the team gets too high on themselves and loses focus. Maybe Winston will get flustered under pressure in a way that was irrelevant tonight because he was pressured so rarely. On the other hand?the upside potential for a redshirt freshman who's already good enough to start for a major program is huge. His ?starting point? is much further along in terms of college and NFL potential than I can recall seeing in a long time. The odds are very good that Jameis is going to be famous. Florida State 41 (-11), Pittsburgh 13 Total Yardage: Florida State 533, Pittsburgh 297 Passing Stats: Florida State 27-29-0-377, Pittsburgh 15-28-2-201 Yards-per-Play: Florida State 8.5, Pittsburgh 5.4 Turnovers: Florida State 0, Pittsburgh 2 Drive Points: Florida State 20, Pittsburgh 10 Stat Score: Florida State 31, Pittsburgh 18 You regulars know about our ?sloppiness score? stat (5 times the number of giveaways plus the number of incomplete passes). Florida State has historically been pretty bad in that offensively through the years, racking up high numbers because Bobby Bowden loved throwing jump balls way down field to his athletes like he was coaching an AFL team in the late 60?s. That worked when he had huge athletic advantages with his receivers. It stopped working as defensive backs became more athletic?more adept at breaking up jump balls?and more adept at picking off jump balls (and as college pass rushes became more sophisticated). Even after Bowden retired, FSU quarterbacks had a knack for making turnovers and throwing a lot of incomplete passes. Sloppiness: Florida State 2, Pittsburgh 23 (lower is better) When teams from major conferences are playing each other, it?s pretty uncommon to see a sparkling sloppiness total of 2 while that same offense gains a whopping 8.5 yards-per-play. That?s big production with almost no risk. And, it?s not coming against the Citadel. FSU will be double digit favorites all the way to their road game at Clemson on October 19?and then possibly again all the way until their regular season finale November 30 at Florida (maybe a home game against Miami on November 2 will put a scare into them). Pretty easy schedule based on what we saw Monday night. Is there anything to say about Pittsburgh? Maybe they just ran into a juggernaut. Maybe they?re finding out why their quarterback had trouble sticking in other places. They go byeNew Mexicoat Duke-Virginia through September. Picture will be clearer by the end of the month. Tags: College Football Florida State Seminoles Pittsburgh Panthers ACC Stat Intelligence | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
College Football Handicapping: Week 1 results for first-year head coaches | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quick look at home first-year head coach fared in Week 1. All told, first-year coaches were 15-15 SU and 14-16 ATS. There were three instances where first-year coaches faced one another. The results were very similar to that of last year (13-12 SU, 12-12 ATS vs. FCS/FBS ? one game was not lined). If we eliminate games against FCS competition, first-year head coaches vs. FBS schools went 9-13 SU and 11-11 ATS this past weekend.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
College Football Gambling Trends: How FBS teams fare after a loss to FCS | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
For the curious, here are the betting results of FBS teams off a loss to an FCS team dating back to 2008. There are some examples of bounce back performances (see: Virginia Tech and Kansas in 2010) but more often than not, when a team loses outright to an FCS squad, it's an indication said team just isn't very good. Note that we did not include FBS newbies South Alabama and Georgia State among this year?s ?casualties.? Overall, it is clear that top-tier FCS teams are just as good if not better than a majority of the FBS. North Dakota State's win at K-State, while shocking to some, was hardly a fluke. The Bison have won back-to-back FCS national titles and since 2008, made our list four times. Overall, FBS teams off a loss to an FCS squad are 7-23 SU, 16-13-1 ATS. Taking it a step further, BCS Conference teams off a loss to FCS are only 4-7 SU/ATS. San Diego State, South Florida, Oregon State, and Kansas State are all in play this week. Iowa State has a bye before playing host to Iowa.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
College Football Betting News and Notes - Week 1 | |
| Submitted by Andrew LangeWith Penn State holding a narrow 13-10 lead late in the third quarter of Saturday's game against Syracuse, the Orange came up with a forced fumble on big PSU pass play. Syracuse's Allen Robinson looked like he had a clear lane to the end zone, a score that would have given his team a 17-13 lead. Instead, PSU offensive tackle Garry Gilliam (a converted tight end) made a great open field, touchdown saving?tackle. Syracuse took over at the PSU 27-yard line and ended up missing a field goal. Early in the fourth quarter, Penn State kicked a field goal, tacked on a touchdown, and held on for the 23-17 win. The Nittany Lions failed to cover (-8) but had Gilliam not made that play, the straight up outcome of the game may have been different.? Favored by -34, Ohio State's Urban Meyer was all business (and perhaps all dick) when he went for and converted two, two-point conversions on the Buckeyes' first two touchdowns of the game. Perhaps some karma involved as Buffalo snagged an easy ATS victory in the 40-20 loss. Boosters Beware! Meyer is now 2-6 ATS when laying double-digits since arriving in Columbus. Last season, Iowa at times toyed with the idea of playing up-tempo but in the end, the Hawkeyes were one of the slowest teams in the country at 66 plays per game. On Saturday, Iowa ran 80 plays and produced 458 yards ? 28 yards better than 2012's top effort. But before we anoint Iowa as "up-tempo" note that in last year's game against NIU, the Hawkeyes ran 82 plays but got progressively slower as the season wore on. So much so that they ran 60 or fewer plays four times. This is why box scores can be deceiving. According to Yahoo Sports, Purdue's lone touchdown drive in its 42-7 loss to Cincinnati went 6 plays for 88 yards. They covered 88 yards but got some help from the Bearcats. Purdue was actually forced to punt but picked up fumble and were handed the ball on the Cincinnati 10-yard line and eventually scored. The Boilermakers' second half drives resulted in punt, interception, fumble, downs, downs, fumble, and end of game. And in watching the game, Cinci was not particularly sharp with three turnovers and a sluggish first half. Could be a long year in West Lafayette. I made a bet and released to my clients a play on Marshall-Miami-Ohio under 67. There were numerous reasons for the play but a majority of my logic was based on the Thundering Herd improving on the defensive end ? not difficult considering they allowed 43.1 ppg last year. All told, my handicap was fairly accurate as Marshall held the RedHawks to nine first downs, 239 total yards, and 14 points. The problem however was that Marshall's offense may be faster and improved. The Herd racked up nearly 600 yards on a whopping 94 plays. With five minutes to go in the first half, I was sitting under 67 with a 7-7 score. But when Marshall has the ball, time essentially stands still. The Herd rolled up a quick score and so did Miami-Ohio leaving the halftime score 14-14. In the second half, Marshall did whatever it wanted on offense and were essentially scoring at will. After a pick six with 10 minutes to go in the game, my once strong bet looked dead in the water with Marshall leading 52-14. Luckily, both teams wanted to get out of dodge and the clock finally started to churn. But not until on 3-and-10, up 38, in the waning seconds did Marshall's back-up QB attempt a pass into the end zone. It was somehow picked off by Miami-Ohio and the game landed 66. I'll obviously take the winner but I don't think I'll be playing very many Marshall games under moving forward even with totals routinely be north of 70. Wasn't Oklahoma's Blake Bell supposed to be the running threat? Trevor Knight earned the starting job over Bell and ended up as the team's leading rusher (13 for 103, long of 24) in the Sooners' 34-0 win over UL-Monroe. Unfortunately for Knight, passing the ball proved extremely difficult as he finished 11-of-28 for 86 yards. They were in control for much of the game so we won't put too much stock into Arkansas' run-pass ratio. However, it is clear that Bret Bielema is going to try to establish the run this season. The Razorbacks rushed for 292 yards on 51 carries in their 34-14 win over UL-Lafayette. Last season, Arkansas never attempted more than 40 rushes in a game. It is hard to get a read on just how "big" the four major FCS upsets were this past weekend because the betting markets were so crazy. On the surface it looked like CRIS just posted a number (any number) and with lower limits was willing to roll the dice. However, there were still betting lines and obvious action on those games so while the numbers may have been "soft" we do have something to go on. Eastern Washington +25.5 at Oregon State? What is funny is while these upsets managed to garner a lot of pub and rightfully so there were hardly any FBS vs. FBS upsets. In fact, the biggest we could spot was Texas State's (+7.5) outright win at Southern Miss who was 0-12 last year. Wyoming was close, losing 37-34 as 30-point dogs at Nebraska. However, it is safe to say that more than a few big upsets loom on the horizon given the nature of college football. Follow me on Twitter @LangeSportsmemo Tags: College Football Andrew Lange | |
Weekly All Sports Special: Three Sports, Full Coverage, Only $99 | |
| Tags: College Football Andrew Lange | |
NFL Betting Podcast 9-2-2013 with Handicapper Teddy Covers | |
| Monday's Sportsmemo Podcast featured handicapper Teddy Covers. Teddy gave his thoughts and opinions on the line moves for Week 1 of the NFL regular season. Today's segments? To listen to past shows, be sure to visit our Sportsmemo Podcast Homepage. ITunes users can subscribe to the show by searching "Sportsmemo" in the podcast directory. Tags: NFL Teddy Covers | |
College Football Betting Recap: Louisville, Colorado Score Sunday Statement Wins | |
| Submitted by Stat Intelligence Sunday afternoon, the Louisville Cardinals made a very strong case for being a legitimate top 10 caliber team rather than a media invention with a rout of Ohio. Later Sunday, Colorado may have rejoined big time football with a victory over state rival Colorado State that was more one-sided than the score made it look. Let?s run the numbers? Louisville 49 (-21), Ohio 7 Total Yardage: Ohio 273, Louisville 615 Passing Stats: Ohio 15-31-1-192, Louisville 25-31-1-416 Yards-per-Play: Ohio 4.6, Louisville 8.7 Turnovers: Ohio 1, Louisville 1 Drive Points: Ohio 0, Louisville 42 Stat Score: Ohio 16, Louisville 36 If you watched the first few series, you knew it was going to be ugly. Louisville showed up ready to play. It was as if they were tired of hearing they didn?t belong in the Top 10. Skeptics believed the early poll nod was a result of a decent team playing an easy schedule rather Louisville being a true powerhouse. Louisville fans would point to the big win over Florida in January?s Sugar Bowl in defense. Well, THIS team today looked pretty legit. Ohio can walk and chew gum. Louisville blew past them like they weren?t even there. That?s 42-0 in Drive Points (those scored on drives of 60 yards or more) against a team that will probably play in a bowl this year. Colorado 41 (+3), Colorado State 27 Total Yardage: Colorado 509, Colorado State 295 Passing Stats: Colorado 33-46-0-400, Colorado State 22-39-0-201 Yards-per-Play: Colorado 6.1, Colorado State 4.4 Turnovers: Colorado 0, Colorado State 2 Drive Points: Colorado 25, Colorado State 10 Stat Score: Colorado 28, Colorado State 17 This was a lot of fun to watch. It was closer than it should have been most of the way because CSU had a cheap TD off a long kickoff return, then a TD on a punt return. You can see that Colorado moved the ball well all day. It?s amazing what having a good coach can do! Mike McIntyre had an immediate impact on Colorado?s fortunes. The media is always very careful not to say that somebody?s in over their heads?even if about 25% of the college coaching field is in that position in a given year. Colorado looks like they finally have a coach who isn't in over his head at a major program. That being said?this was still a bit too pass-heavy. You can?t count on playing without turnovers every game. And, obviously there?s a lack of athletes on special teams?which will be a big concern once Pac 12 play begins. Baby steps. Colorado shouldn?t have been the underdog based on those one-sided neutral field numbers. They?re climbing back to relevance, which is great to see. Tags: College Football Colorado Buffaloes PAC-12 Louisville Cardinals AAC Stat Intelligence | |
Teddy Covers' Las Vegas Wise Guy Report: Using coach-speak in your handicap | |
| Submitted by Teddy CoversPart of the standard handicapping mantra includes ?checking the local papers? and ?watching the coach?s press conference? in an effort to get quality information that the betting markets aren?t paying attention too.? Computer algorithms designed to beat pointspreads can?t and don?t handicap coach-speak.? Few bettors actually take the time to do their homework.? So ?cappers who make and take the time to check local sources and press conferences can find legitimate edges that are overlooked by most others ? good information. There?s no dictionary to help you translate coach-speak into betting decisions.? And in all the years I?ve been writing about sports betting, I?ve never once written a how-to article on how to approach coaches quotes.? It?s time. This past week, while doing my research for the upcoming college football games, I ran into a press conference from Skip Holtz.? Skip was a very successful coach at East Carolina and UConn, then a very unsuccessful coach at South Florida.? In 2013, Holtz is taking over at Louisiana Tech, now that Sonny Dykes has moved to Cal. On paper, Louisiana Tech looked to be in the midst of a rebuilding season.? The Bulldogs offense jumped from 30 points per game in 2011 to 51 points per game in 2012, the single highest scoring offense in the country.? But after winning nine games ? their best season in decades ? not only did they lose their head coach and his entire staff, but also most of their key personnel.? The Bulldogs would be breaking in a new quarterback, four new offensive linemen, and most of their back seven on defense, returning only seven guys who started last year.? So I went hunting for information from fall camp to see how the team was progressing in the transition from Dykes to Holtz. And I found Holtz?s press conference transcript.? I thought his words would provide a great example of how to translate coach-speak and use that information for betting purposes.? Holtz?s quotes will be in italics, my commentary will be in normal print. Holtz: ?Coming in with so much inexperience and so many guys that had not played, we wanted to get the depth chart formulated so we could really start working with the guys that are going to play.? It has taken us a little while to do that because with so many guys that missed spring ball and so many new additions that came in over the course of the summer that are in our two-deep.? My translation:? Spring practice was a mess.? We?re not comfortable yet with our depth charts and not 100% sure we?ve got the most talented guys on the field. Holtz: ?Especially with the kicking game?..you do not know who to put on your punt team and your kickoff team.? My translation: Expect at least one special teams miscue on opening day, if not more. Holtz: ?We wanted to really develop leadership and bring this team together?.you just have so many new players in the secondary and linebackers that it?s hard for them to take a leadership role.? My translation: This defense is going to get gashed.? And when things start to go south, they aren?t going to get any better. Holtz: ?We were trying to develop experience and that is hard to do. I wish we had a maturity pill that we could give a lot of these guys that would make them a little bit more comfortable in that role.? My translation: This team lacks leadership and will crumble when tested on the road. Holtz, answering a question on what a win in his first game at Louisiana Tech would mean to him: ?I think I?m more concerned with how we respond to the first game than I am with what happens in the first game?I think it?s going to be more of what we learn from this.? My translation: Gee, the coach is telling us that he?s more concerned with how they respond to adversity than with winning the ballgame.? I think that?s meaningful information. Holtz: ?I think as a football coach, you just have to make sure that in the opening game you have to be as simple as you can be to give your players an opportunity to go out on the field and play and not be robotical because they are paralysis through analysis where they are thinking so much and trying to get lined up.? Our defense is really going to have to digest a lot of different information in a hurry.? My translation: They don?t have a great gameplan and Holtz is clearly worried about his defense?s ability to get stops. Holtz, on the importance of halftime adjustments: ?We do not have players that have been in our systems for three or four years that can go back and remember when we did that last year?.adjustments and how simple you can make them so the players can go out and execute them in the second half.? My translation: If things go bad in the first half, don?t expect the second half to be any different.? ased on my translation of Holtz?s coach-speak, I made a substantial wager on NC State minus the points on Saturday, and advised my clients to do the same ? the bet was 20* Big Ticket worthy.? And it played out perfectly, with NC State winning 40-14 as 13.5- or 14-point favorites. As with every game I bet, after it?s over, I do a post mortem analysis to see what I got right and what I got wrong; in an effort to always keep growing and learning as a bettor.? In this instance, Holtz gave us pretty accurate information that played out largely as he said it would. NC State got the ball first, and marched right down the field into the end zone without even facing a single third down.? Louisiana Tech went three-and-out.? NC State got the ball back and needed only five plays to drive 75 yards for another touchdown.? Louisiana Tech went three-and-out again.? I have to say, up 14-0 less than halfway through the first quarter, I felt pretty good about my wager. Then the Wolfpack lost starting quarterback Brandon Mitchell to a serious foot injury and momentum shifted in a hurry. Louisiana Tech forced a punt, and then executed a great drive, taking 14 plays to set up a first and goal at the Wolfpack two-yard line.? Here, I got lucky, when Bulldogs star RB Kenneth Dixon fumbled into the end zone for a touchback.? Following a ?three-and-out? from NC State with backup QB Pete Thomas behind center, the Bulldogs put together another good drive, but that also ended with a red zone fumble.? The Wolfpack took advantage, got some momentum, and scored another TD.? By the time Tech got the ball for the two minute drill, the game was 24-0 Wolfpack. Louisiana Tech actually rallied a bit, cutting the lead to 27-14 at one point in the third quarter, but NC State never get them get any closer, and the fourth quarter was largely non-competitive.? ? Louisiana Tech was unable to make dramatic in-game or halftime adjustments.? Their early game struggles correlated with their late game struggles. But Holtz?s concerns about his special teams never materialized.? There were no blocked punts, no crucial change of possession penalties and no long returns allowed.?? And frankly, as I watched the game, I was impressed with Louisiana Tech?s defensive leadership; stepping up repeatedly in the red zone to keep the game within striking distance by forcing four field goals.? They faced adversity fairly well, in my opinion, and actually performed better than the final score would indicate. And that?s the best case scenario for a situation like this one.? My clients and I cashed winning bets against Louisiana Tech, and Holtz?s coach-speak gave me valuable information.? The box score looks bad, and we can expect the betting markets to look to fade this squad in the weeks to come.? But the biggest plays in the game were the two Bulldogs red zone turnovers as Tech was trying to fight back from their early deficit.? The potential exists for value betting ON Louisiana Tech somewhere down the line. Find Teddy at Sportsmemo.com and follow him on Twitter @teddy_covers Tags: College Football NC State Wolfpack ACC Louisiana Tech Bulldogs C-USA Teddy Covers | |
College Football Betting Recap: Clemson, LSU Score Showcase Victories | |
| Submitted by Stat Intelligence As promised, back with numbers and notes from the two marquee prime time games in Saturday night college football. Let?s see what happened in Georgia/Clemson and LSU/TCU? Clemson 38 (+1.5), Georgia 35 Total Yardage: Georgia 544, Clemson 467 Passing Stats: Georgia 20-29-1-323, Clemson 18-30-0-270 Yards-per-Play: Georgia 7.8, Clemson 6.1 Turnovers: Georgia 2, Clemson 1 Drive Points: Georgia 35, Clemson 24 Stat Score: Georgia 34, Clemson 30 Exhilarating first half, followed by more of a sluggish second half (42 combined points in the first half, jut 31 in the second). Georgia screwed up a chippy field goal attempt that ended up being the difference maker. You can see that Georgia had the better stats outside of turnovers. Turnovers are usually worth about four points in value. Apply that to the stat score and we get a dead heat. If Georgia doesn?t muck up that short field goal it?s a dead heat. Two very good teams who will be in the hunt to play in marquee bowls once again. Poor Georgia has to get ready quickly for South Carolina, which is next week?s showcase game in the SEC.? LSU 37 (-4), TCU 27 Total Yardage: LSU 448, TCU 259 Passing Stats: LSU 16-32-0-251, TCU 15-28-1-145 Yards-per-Play: LSU 5.6, TCU 4.8 Turnovers: LSU 1, TCU 2 Drive Points: LSU 27, TCU 10 Stat Score: LSU 29, TCU 17 The stats?and the actual game?were much more one-sided than the final victory margin. TCU cashed in some cheap points. LSU drove the field consistently in a way that wasn?t supposed to be possible against the TCU defense. Another game where third downs helped tell the story. LSU was a stunning 13 of 19 on third down tries, for 68%. That helped them generate a +26 differential in plays run (80-54). Disappointing result for TCU and the Big 12. Not as bad as Kansas State losing to North Dakota State, or Iowa State losing to Northern Iowa, or West Virginia almost losing to William & Mary, or Nebraska only winning by 3 as 30-point favorites over Wyoming (oh, wait, they?re not in the Big 12 any more?I still felt residual embarrassment for the conference) or Oklahoma going 14-33-1-124 passing against a Sun Belt defense, or Texas going scoreless in the first 28 minutes vs. high school caliber New Mexico State. Even when Big 12 teams won and covered there was something worth complaining about! The Athlon preseason publication had TCU as #4 in the Big 12?with LSU as #5 in the SEC. This was a statistical squash on a ?road-neutral? field, particularly in Drive Points (those scored on drives of 60 yards or more). Good snapshot of the SEC?s edge over the Big 12 at the moment. Tags: College Football LSU Tigers SEC Clemson Tigers ACC Stat Intelligence | |
College Football Gambling: 2nd Half Kickoff List - Week 1 | |
| We'll be updating the list throug Cassadee Pope MLB Draft 2013 Brian Hallisay Deacon Jones Mel B Gordon Gee National Hurricane Center
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.