Sham: Let's start with this weekday's all too plentiful MAC crapfests. I have to say I'm legitimately surprised by the splits in favor of Buffalo on Tuesday night. Toledo and their horrid defense will get a look on Wednesday. The cream of the MAC Conference (Fake Miami and Crakron) will get looks later in the week as well. Thoughts about any potential plays during the week?
am19psu: Wow, I totally forgot about this. My real life needs to calm down.
My first thought about the weeknight games are: does the MAC really think they are getting that much more exposure by scheduling all of these weeknight games?
I guess Fake Miami and their 1-9 record will get my attention the most this week. I'm not really excited about any of them to be totally honest. I was looking at the volume of these games at Wagerline the last few weeks and it is well below average.
Both Big East games look unplayable as well.
S: The almost automatic Houston opponent lean is led this week by the UCF Knights. This time instead of being steamed down, Houston has actually gone up, I'm trying not to look too much into that.
19: Just what my life needs, more George O'Leary. That was one of those lines that I completely screwed up this week. Looking into it a bit further, the Knights really aren't bad for a CUSA team. They were in the game in both their league losses and looked semi-respectable against Texas for a half.
Going to another conference we rarely bet on, I was surprised by the Troy/Arky line. My guess was absurdly wrong, but I didn't realize any team in the Sun Belt was three touchdowns better than winless Eastern Michigan. I really need to pay better attention to the small conferences. Think the Hogs will attract enough action for a play?
S: I'm not sure how much action this game will attract but on the surface I like Troy in this one. It fits perfectly with square circular reasoning as Florida beat Troy 56-6 at home and Arkansas played Florida tough on the road before falling 23-20. I'm sure you'll see squares cite these two scores as justification for a play on the Razorbacks who by their estimates is about 47 points better than Troy, 14.5 should be no problem.
Let's focus on a team that is actually good, TCU. Will Utah +17 entice the casual bettor?
19: Yeah, Sun Belt team only getting two TDs on the road against an ESS-EE-SEE school ought to do the trick, let alone the transitive property you mentioned.
It's not often you see #4 -17.5 vs. #16 in the MWC. TCU is pretty clearly the side if there is one, but the way the Frogs have been rolling teams the last four weeks, I'm not sure Utes will be all that public.
This card generally sucks. Nothing else really jumps out at me except Nebraska only -4 against Kansas. Reesing has looked like garbage the last few weeks, but it's not like Nebraska's offense has been lighting it up either. Can you bring yourself to fade the Huskers?
S: I've done it before this year with Arky St (didn't work out so well). I was surprised to see the line this low and I'm legitimately worried about a letdown after the defense single-handedly defeated OU. It's a situation where I would normally be all over KU but I'll take a wait-and-see approach.
Any chance Penn St sneaks onto your card with so few options this week?
19: I doubt it. I'm already disappointed in this team. I don't need to be a drag on everyone in State College if they don't cover the three TDs.
I just looked over at Wagerline. Wow, there is a lot of ACC nonsense this week, isn't there?
S: That's for sure. Duke looks almost automatic against the Ramblin' Wreck. The continuous fading of Real Miami will most likely continue as well. NC St and Virginia will get a looks as well.
I was surprised by USC opening up as a double-digit fave against Stanford. You had other thoughts, care to elaborate?
19: I couldn't do math in my head after work yesterday? I added an extra four points of HFA to that line. Was it really that surprising though? Stanford closed at +6.5 at home against Oregon, flip that around to +13.5-14.5 on the road and Oregon was a three point dog to USC at home. Obviously some adjustment was necessary, since both teams are closer to USC in current power rankings, but it was clearly a double digit game to me. I just wish Stanford would have lost to Oregon. I don't think we're going to get much of a chance to play it, especially after Barkley's stinker on Saturday. It looks like you adjusted it too far and I didn't go quite far enough.
Last one, and I'll leave the commentary to you: how much of a dog does Iowa open as if Stanzi healthy?
S: I believe a healthy Stanzi puts Iowa at +10.5. Wow, just looked up this line and it has moved from the opener of 13.5 to 17.
OU is on my radar, but that line is trending upwards and I wouldn't be surprised to see it go past 21. Wake was a lean before Ponder went down with his season-ending injury. Notre Dame appears playable against a Top 10 Pitt team (didn't feel right typing that). ISU intrigues me as well, for whatever reason. Yeah, this card blows.
19: I would rather self castrate with a rusty spoon than back Jimmy Heisman. Until next week.
0 comments:
Post a Comment