Lean Bama here. MSU has been the beneficiary of winning games by inches and miracle plays. Don't see them doing much vs this Bama defense. Bama by 10 sounds about right. They will wear much St down late in the game.
Bingo!!!
Bingo!!!
Bingo!!!
Absent some divine intervention, Michigan State has no shot of scoring 17 points in this game. They couldn't even score 17 on Iowa for goodness sake!!!
Absent some divine intervention, Michigan State has no shot of scoring 17 points in this game. They couldn't even score 17 on Iowa for goodness sake!!!
I'm not embarrassed by anything that happens on any message board. Perhaps your manhood is that fragile, but I can assure you mine is not.
I have no idea what "three" you are talking about. I've missed a whole lot more than three Alabama bets in my days.
Nope, there's never any shame, just an ugly looking balance in my wagering account.
There is a way for Michigan State to cover, but it will probably take at least two non-offensive touchdowns for that to happen. If you want to wager on two non-offensive touchdowns, I would like to hold you wager. I'll even give you -13.5.
Several people have questioned me in this very thread including you, so that argument doesn't seem to hold much water.
My views are unbalanced in the extreme like when I recommended to everyone on Covers just last week NOT to bet Alabama at -17 or more, and went on recommend a bet on Florida +10 (1st half)? Is that the "unbalanced in the extreme" you are talking about?
Please consider a more thoughtful post the next time you feel the urge to click the "Submit" button.
I'm not embarrassed by anything that happens on any message board. Perhaps your manhood is that fragile, but I can assure you mine is not.
I have no idea what "three" you are talking about. I've missed a whole lot more than three Alabama bets in my days.
Nope, there's never any shame, just an ugly looking balance in my wagering account.
There is a way for Michigan State to cover, but it will probably take at least two non-offensive touchdowns for that to happen. If you want to wager on two non-offensive touchdowns, I would like to hold you wager. I'll even give you -13.5.
Several people have questioned me in this very thread including you, so that argument doesn't seem to hold much water.
My views are unbalanced in the extreme like when I recommended to everyone on Covers just last week NOT to bet Alabama at -17 or more, and went on recommend a bet on Florida +10 (1st half)? Is that the "unbalanced in the extreme" you are talking about?
Please consider a more thoughtful post the next time you feel the urge to click the "Submit" button.
I'm not embarrassed by anything that happens on any message board. Perhaps your manhood is that fragile, but I can assure you mine is not.
I have no idea what "three" you are talking about. I've missed a whole lot more than three Alabama bets in my days.
Nope, there's never any shame, just an ugly looking balance in my wagering account.
There is a way for Michigan State to cover, but it will probably take at least two non-offensive touchdowns for that to happen. If you want to wager on two non-offensive touchdowns, I would like to hold you wager. I'll even give you -13.5.
Several people have questioned me in this very thread including you, so that argument doesn't seem to hold much water.
My views are unbalanced in the extreme like when I recommended to everyone on Covers just last week NOT to bet Alabama at -17 or more, and went on recommend a bet on Florida +10 (1st half)? Is that the "unbalanced in the extreme" you are talking about?
Please consider a more thoughtful post the next time you feel the urge to click the "Submit" button.
I'm not embarrassed by anything that happens on any message board. Perhaps your manhood is that fragile, but I can assure you mine is not.
I have no idea what "three" you are talking about. I've missed a whole lot more than three Alabama bets in my days.
Nope, there's never any shame, just an ugly looking balance in my wagering account.
There is a way for Michigan State to cover, but it will probably take at least two non-offensive touchdowns for that to happen. If you want to wager on two non-offensive touchdowns, I would like to hold you wager. I'll even give you -13.5.
Several people have questioned me in this very thread including you, so that argument doesn't seem to hold much water.
My views are unbalanced in the extreme like when I recommended to everyone on Covers just last week NOT to bet Alabama at -17 or more, and went on recommend a bet on Florida +10 (1st half)? Is that the "unbalanced in the extreme" you are talking about?
Please consider a more thoughtful post the next time you feel the urge to click the "Submit" button.
Has it been 3 years since Bama won a bowl game?
Has it been 3 years since Bama won a bowl game?
Football is game about matchups. That is concept that most gamblers don't seem to grasp. In this game Michigan State's offense versus Alabama defense is a complete mismatch in favor of Alabama. The Spartans offense, which struggled mightily against an Iowa defense that probably has zero future 1st round draft picks, is not on the same level as an Alabama defense that probably has 5 or 6 future 1st round draft picks.
The last two touchdowns Alabama's defense has given up is a ricochet pass, and a Hail Mary, and it's probably going to take about the same type of play from Michigan State's offense to find the end zone in this game. The chance of them mounting a methodical touchdown drive against this defense like they did against Iowa is pretty much zero. Took the words right out of my mouth...
If you're betting that Michigan State has faced defenses on par with Alabama's defense, you're gong to lose you're money because they haven't. While I don't think Michigan State will get shutout in this game, it definitely has shutout potential. Michigan State will stay as close as their defense can keep it. Ultimately however, like LSU, Mississippi State, Auburn and Florida before them, their defense will get pulverized in the 2nd half because they simply don't have the depth to withstand the relentless pounding for 4 quarters. This is what I have been saying about all the teams we go against... It stays close for the first half, but I always know that eventually that offensive line and Henry are going to pound teams into submission... I was looking at Michigan St's defensive line, and they have some athletes that are experienced, lots of seniors starting, but they are backed up by freshmen, which will be the reason they fall apart...
To illustrate, I was watching the Florida game with a kid who is somewhat of a football novice. Right at the end of the 3rd quarter the announcers mentioned that Henry had 92 yards rushing. I told the kid that Henry would have between 180 and 200 yards rushing before it was over. I stressed that he would have AT LEAST 180 yards. He finished with 189. The exact same paradigm will play out in this game.
I would actually like a Michigan State 1st half bet if I could get +10 like I could with Florida, but that's never going to happen. I have to get over a touchdown to even consider a Sparty 1st half play, and I just don't see that coming to fruition. Sparty's defense will keep this game close in the 1st half, but they will get brutalized in the 2nd half. Was also saying this that the first half would be a good one...
Lay the 11 with Alabama, and hammer the crap out of Alabama (2nd half) if the game is somewhat close at the half - which is very likely.
Football is game about matchups. That is concept that most gamblers don't seem to grasp. In this game Michigan State's offense versus Alabama defense is a complete mismatch in favor of Alabama. The Spartans offense, which struggled mightily against an Iowa defense that probably has zero future 1st round draft picks, is not on the same level as an Alabama defense that probably has 5 or 6 future 1st round draft picks.
The last two touchdowns Alabama's defense has given up is a ricochet pass, and a Hail Mary, and it's probably going to take about the same type of play from Michigan State's offense to find the end zone in this game. The chance of them mounting a methodical touchdown drive against this defense like they did against Iowa is pretty much zero. Took the words right out of my mouth...
If you're betting that Michigan State has faced defenses on par with Alabama's defense, you're gong to lose you're money because they haven't. While I don't think Michigan State will get shutout in this game, it definitely has shutout potential. Michigan State will stay as close as their defense can keep it. Ultimately however, like LSU, Mississippi State, Auburn and Florida before them, their defense will get pulverized in the 2nd half because they simply don't have the depth to withstand the relentless pounding for 4 quarters. This is what I have been saying about all the teams we go against... It stays close for the first half, but I always know that eventually that offensive line and Henry are going to pound teams into submission... I was looking at Michigan St's defensive line, and they have some athletes that are experienced, lots of seniors starting, but they are backed up by freshmen, which will be the reason they fall apart...
To illustrate, I was watching the Florida game with a kid who is somewhat of a football novice. Right at the end of the 3rd quarter the announcers mentioned that Henry had 92 yards rushing. I told the kid that Henry would have between 180 and 200 yards rushing before it was over. I stressed that he would have AT LEAST 180 yards. He finished with 189. The exact same paradigm will play out in this game.
I would actually like a Michigan State 1st half bet if I could get +10 like I could with Florida, but that's never going to happen. I have to get over a touchdown to even consider a Sparty 1st half play, and I just don't see that coming to fruition. Sparty's defense will keep this game close in the 1st half, but they will get brutalized in the 2nd half. Was also saying this that the first half would be a good one...
Lay the 11 with Alabama, and hammer the crap out of Alabama (2nd half) if the game is somewhat close at the half - which is very likely.
When you get a moment, you may want to revisit the definition of the word "team."
When you get a moment, you may want to revisit the definition of the word "team."
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.