All Forums | College Football

Freak Pics!!! (Week 1)

...

Participants:

Search

Posts: 687

Spartacus10

Captain

Joined: May, 2011

Posts: 5715

Posted: Aug. 23, 2013 - 11:22 PM ET #51

Quote Originally Posted by sims_key:

easily the best NCAAF capper on the site.

And there's really no close second. Not only does Jimmy know the game extremely well, but he's able to successfully carry that knowledge over to the wagering side of things, which is a huge compliment itself. Good luck this season jimmy, crush the books as usual.

0

ksuwins

Veteran

Joined: Sep, 2004

Posts: 4058

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 12:14 AM ET #52

Quote Originally Posted by jimmydafreak:

Time for football!!!

Most of you know that I bet a lot of 1st half UNDERS, and that I usually do quite well with these wagers.

Never hit 'em til you got me hooked.

My strength is the SEC, so I try to stay as close to home as much as possible. I always check in for the SEC plays, hoping we're on the same page.

Glad to see you on three of my faves:

UNC/USC 1st hlf Under

ULM +23

Bobcats +20.5

I'll check in with a few other first half Unders that I'm leaning on...

0

LGinTX

Prospect

Joined: Sep, 2010

Posts: 385

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 12:16 AM ET #53

Jimmy, I don't post much, but when I do, it's to wish you good luck this year.

0

jimmydafreak

All-Star

Joined: Oct, 2003

Posts: 13864

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 2:40 AM ET #54

Quote Originally Posted by jdnmoney:

ULM

A&m vs rice over

Ohio

Im going to follow suit and unload on alabama. BOL guy

Really respect ur opinion.

I have mad respect for all the work you put into this forum JDN!!! I can't speak for others, but I very much appreciate it.

0

jimmydafreak

All-Star

Joined: Oct, 2003

Posts: 13864

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 2:45 AM ET #55

Quote Originally Posted by kahuna57:

Good luck freak...have a few of these also. Dont understand why so much fade interest amongst pub with Ole Miss...gladly taking against the grain Rebels.

I agree, although I am hearing some non-football related negative stuff concerning Robert Nkemdiche. Hopefully it will not effect the product on the field Thursday night.

0

buddygurt

Veteran

Joined: Feb, 2004

Posts: 4718

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 2:49 AM ET #56

Like the while card here

GL this week

0

buddygurt

Veteran

Joined: Feb, 2004

Posts: 4718

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 2:50 AM ET #57

Whole too ^^^

0

kahuna57

Veteran

Joined: Oct, 2007

Posts: 1084

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 2:52 AM ET #58

Even if without him, I think a lot of these cats will be driven just by how last years game ended.

0

jimmydafreak

All-Star

Joined: Oct, 2003

Posts: 13864

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 3:09 AM ET #59

Quote Originally Posted by thorpe:

The formatting and colors add a lot to the character count.

Good luck this week/year.

The only bet I disagree with is your SC/NC Under. I see a lot of points this game for some reason.

I understand. When I first capped this game, the total was a bit higher. I was looking for a total north of 28. Right now it looks like the number will be right at the 28-point mark. I will bet it at 28, but won't go lower than that.

thorpe, look at how Spurrier has played Chad Morris' up tempo offense the past two years. South Carolina's game plan was to grind it out on the ground and keep Clemson's offense off the field. USC rushed the ball a whopping 45 times for 134 yards, and dominated TOP 2 to 1. USC kept Clemson way below their average plays per game, and held them to 17 points.

In the 2011 game there was a 15 minute differential in TOP. In that game USC ran 73 plays (53 of which were rushing plays) to 60 by Clemson, and held Clemson to 13 points,

I think we'll see Spurrier will blow the dust off his Clemson's game plan, and attack UNC in a similar fashion. I see USC winning this game by a score of something like 31-17.

0

jimmydafreak

All-Star

Joined: Oct, 2003

Posts: 13864

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 3:12 AM ET #60

Quote Originally Posted by kahuna57:

Even if without him, I think a lot of these cats will be driven just by how last years game ended.

I have no doubt Nkemdiche will play. And yes, there is no doubt that Ole Miss is itching to avenge last season's loss. I'm still very confident they get it done.

0

jimmydafreak

All-Star

Joined: Oct, 2003

Posts: 13864

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 3:31 AM ET #61

Quote Originally Posted by dugie243:

great stuff jimmy, looking forward to a great year. who you got in the title game? bama vs ?

GL to all

Honestly, I haven't spent much time thinking about it. I am more confident than I have been in any year that Alabama will be there. This is the best overall team of the Saban era, and they have a scheduled taylor made for a title run. I really don't see anyone beating them this season.

As far as an opponent is concerned, Ohio State is the obvious choice since the only game on their schedule is Michigan basically. Maybe Northwestern can give them a game, I dunno.

I'd like to see Oregon make it. I was rooting for an Alabama/Oregon showdown last season. I think it would have been a much more interesting match-up - the clash of opposing styles if you will. I'm not complaining because I did make a good bit of coin on the game.

I like both Clemson and Florida State a lot, but I'm not sure if even the winner of the head-to-head match-up can run the table. Besides Florida State, Clemson would still have to get past Georgia (and I think they will) and South Carolina (not sure they will). FSU would still have to get past Florida. On top of that, the winner of the Atlantic may have to get past Miami in the ACC Championship Game. That won't be an easy game.

I really don't see anyone emerging out of the Big 12. I have zero faith in a Mack Brown/Manny Diaz coached team. I think they'll be decent, not not national championship game worthy. I like for Baylor to surprise some people this season.

Best of luck with your wagering endevors this season dugie!!!

0

Kaka123

Captain

Joined: Jul, 2011

Posts: 9003

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 9:01 AM ET #62

@jimmydafreak

Are numbers in College Football more psychological than they are in the NFL where the books have more data to go on and make tight lines? I'm asking because you went 31-13 on your best bets last year hitting 70.5%, which would be impossible to do in the NFL over the same amount of bets.

0

salo76

Prospect

Joined: Apr, 2005

Posts: 343

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 9:28 AM ET #63

Looks solid Jimmy! Thanks for sharing.

Here's to a great season

0

nostradamus12

All-Star

Joined: Jun, 2007

Posts: 10740

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 9:44 AM ET #64

nice card as usual, good to see you're on LSU and solid pick on u27 1st half Ole Miss, BOL this season bud

0

shark_apreza

All-Star

Joined: Dec, 2009

Posts: 12718

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 11:56 AM ET #65

bol this season jimmy

0

trawler

Prospect

Joined: Jul, 2013

Posts: 407

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 1:00 PM ET #66

You the man Freak!

0

WHATTEAMULIKE

Prospect

Joined: Jul, 2012

Posts: 266

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 1:17 PM ET #67

SEMINOLES-1000$

0

EatWeights

Rookie

Joined: Oct, 2011

Posts: 758

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 5:06 PM ET #68

Looking good jimmy. cant wait to see what this year is like
..

0

jimmydafreak

All-Star

Joined: Oct, 2003

Posts: 13864

Posted: Aug. 24, 2013 - 11:15 PM ET #69

Quote Originally Posted by MexiNCAA:

Hi Jimmy!!! great to hear you again... wish you the best this year and have a nice season in college!

I am curios about Oak the first week.

Thanks and we are ready to start the game!

MEXI

If "Oak" is Oklahoma, I obviously like for Louisiana-Monroe to play the Sooners tough in week 1.

ULM returns 17 starters from a team that went 8 & 5 last season. One of those 8 wins included a straight-up win over Arkansas. They also had a narrow OT loss to Auburn - a game they probably should have won - and played toe-to-toe with a very good Baylor squad. They covered all 3 three games.

Of the returning starters, one of them is 4-year starting QB Kolton Browning. Last year he threw for 3049 yards and 39 touchdowns against only 10 interceptions in 539 pass attempts.

ULM also boasts the top offensive line in the Sunbelt Conference. They return almost everyone on a line that returns an 18th best 86 career starts.

I expect Oklahoma to struggle to find their footing in the 1st half of the season, particularly on the defensive side of the ball where they only return 4 starters. They are also making some slight philosophical adjustments on both sides of the ball that could cause continuity issues early on.

I think the decision to name Trevor Knight the starting QB probably gives Oklahoma a little more upside potential, but I don't see that potential being realized in week 1 against ULM.

ULM will not be intimidated by Oklahoma one bit. They played toe-to-toe last season with teams that had talent similar to what Oklahoma has. ULM won't come into this game with the attidude of keeping the game close, they'll come into this game believing they can pull off an upset.

ULM will spread the field and try and dink and dunk their way down the field, and when nothing is there, Browning will frustrate the defense by tucking and running for 1st downs. ULM will test an Oklahoma defense that has followed an unpromising trajectory over the past 3 or 4 years, and with only 4 returning starters, I'm not sure they'll be able to reverse the downward trend this season - at least early on.

ULM's offense will test Oklahoma's defense, and should be able to put up enough points to easily keep this within the number.

Play ULM plus the 23.

0

Quote Originally Posted by MexiNCAA:

Hi Jimmy!!! great to hear you again... wish you the best this year and have a nice season in college!

I am curios about Oak the first week.

Thanks and we are ready to start the game!

MEXI

If "Oak" is Oklahoma, I obviously like for Louisiana-Monroe to play the Sooners tough in week 1.

ULM returns 17 starters from a team that went 8 & 5 last season. One of those 8 wins included a straight-up win over Arkansas. They also had a narrow OT loss to Auburn - a game they probably should have won - and played toe-to-toe with a very good Baylor squad. They covered all 3 three games.

Of the returning starters, one of them is 4-year starting QB Kolton Browning. Last year he threw for 3049 yards and 39 touchdowns against only 10 interceptions in 539 pass attempts.

ULM also boasts the top offensive line in the Sunbelt Conference. They return almost everyone on a line that returns an 18th best 86 career starts.

I expect Oklahoma to struggle to find their footing in the 1st half of the season, particularly on the defensive side of the ball where they only return 4 starters. They are also making some slight philosophical adjustments on both sides of the ball that could cause continuity issues early on.

I think the decision to name Trevor Knight the starting QB probably gives Oklahoma a little more upside potential, but I don't see that potential being realized in week 1 against ULM.

ULM will not be intimidated by Oklahoma one bit. They played toe-to-toe last season with teams that had talent similar to what Oklahoma has. ULM won't come into this game with the attidude of keeping the game close, they'll come into this game believing they can pull off an upset.

ULM will spread the field and try and dink and dunk their way down the field, and when nothing is there, Browning will frustrate the defense by tucking and running for 1st downs. ULM will test an Oklahoma defense that has followed an unpromising trajectory over the past 3 or 4 years, and with only 4 returning starters, I'm not sure they'll be able to reverse the downward trend this season - at least early on.

ULM's offense will test Oklahoma's defense, and should be able to put up enough points to easily keep this within the number.

Play ULM plus the 23.

jimmydafreak

All-Star

Joined: Oct, 2003

Posts: 13864

Posted: Aug. 25, 2013 - 12:05 AM ET #70

Quote Originally Posted by Sabanade:

I am on the same side on several of your picks. Quick question, and because I don't play O/U's as much, how much less/more difficult is it to predict teams' offensive prowess in 1st week games vs. later in the season? You are a poster I truly respect and would love to know your confidence level of predicting 1st H Unders on games of teams that haven't played yet. On one hand, I can see the 1st H U's being gold based on teams just getting the kinks out and the D's having an initial advantage. On the other hand, I can see the O's having an advantage in first games based upon the fact that the D's don't have a firm grasp of the type of attack the O's will utilize.

Do you have any stats how your 1st H U's have fared first week vs, successive weeks in previous years?

Thanks Freak

If I understand your question correctly, I answered part of your question in the 1st post when I said that I like to only bet on known quantities. In other words, I'm betting on stable teams, or I'm fading unstable ones. That is true whether I'm betting a side or a total.

For example, I love the Temple/Notre Dame UNDER. In betting the UNDER, I am essentially betting on a known quantity, which is Notre Dame's defense. I like Notre Dame a lot in this game, but I think the line is very sharp. I'm not confident enough in the Notre Dame offense to score in the high 30s or 40s, which is what they would probably have to do to cover a 30-point spread. Because I lack confidence in Notre Dame's offense, and because I believe Temple will have a very difficult time scoring on Notre Dame's defense, I really like the UNDER. But as I said, the impetus of my play is my confidence in the Notre Dame defense, because Notre Dame's defense is a known quantity that I think will produce predictable results.

As far as betting UNDERS for the first half versus the game, there are some pluses and minus to both. There were a couple of times where I bet 1st half UNDERS where the game went OVER the total for the 1st half, but UNDER for the game. But I also had the reverse happen. I didn't track the results, but I think I came out ahead betting the 1st half UNDERS at the end of the season.

The biggest benefit to betting UNDERS for the first half only is that you avoid the hazard of the college OT rules. You also avoid teams that are losing resorting to desperate measures to score points at the end of a game, such as attempting onside kicks, and going for it on 4th down situations where they otherwise would punt the ball.

I think the draw back is that teams often enter the game with a very well-thought out game plan of how to attack to oppositions defense. They may even scrip their first 10 plays or so. Accordingly, you often see teams get early scores before the defenses make adjustments to slow down the opposing offense. What I have found is that if you can whether the initial offensive onslaughts, you'll usually be in pretty good shape. What you don't have to worry about are teams resorting to extraordinary measures to score before the end of the 1st half.

Overall, I found that the benefits of betting 1st half UNDERS outweighs the benefits of betting game UNDERS. And hey, it's been working for me, so I think I'll stay the course.

0

Quote Originally Posted by Sabanade:

I am on the same side on several of your picks. Quick question, and because I don't play O/U's as much, how much less/more difficult is it to predict teams' offensive prowess in 1st week games vs. later in the season? You are a poster I truly respect and would love to know your confidence level of predicting 1st H Unders on games of teams that haven't played yet. On one hand, I can see the 1st H U's being gold based on teams just getting the kinks out and the D's having an initial advantage. On the other hand, I can see the O's having an advantage in first games based upon the fact that the D's don't have a firm grasp of the type of attack the O's will utilize.

Do you have any stats how your 1st H U's have fared first week vs, successive weeks in previous years?

Thanks Freak

If I understand your question correctly, I answered part of your question in the 1st post when I said that I like to only bet on known quantities. In other words, I'm betting on stable teams, or I'm fading unstable ones. That is true whether I'm betting a side or a total.

For example, I love the Temple/Notre Dame UNDER. In betting the UNDER, I am essentially betting on a known quantity, which is Notre Dame's defense. I like Notre Dame a lot in this game, but I think the line is very sharp. I'm not confident enough in the Notre Dame offense to score in the high 30s or 40s, which is what they would probably have to do to cover a 30-point spread. Because I lack confidence in Notre Dame's offense, and because I believe Temple will have a very difficult time scoring on Notre Dame's defense, I really like the UNDER. But as I said, the impetus of my play is my confidence in the Notre Dame defense, because Notre Dame's defense is a known quantity that I think will produce predictable results.

As far as betting UNDERS for the first half versus the game, there are some pluses and minus to both. There were a couple of times where I bet 1st half UNDERS where the game went OVER the total for the 1st half, but UNDER for the game. But I also had the reverse happen. I didn't track the results, but I think I came out ahead betting the 1st half UNDERS at the end of the season.

The biggest benefit to betting UNDERS for the first half only is that you avoid the hazard of the college OT rules. You also avoid teams that are losing resorting to desperate measures to score points at the end of a game, such as attempting onside kicks, and going for it on 4th down situations where they otherwise would punt the ball.

I think the draw back is that teams often enter the game with a very well-thought out game plan of how to attack to oppositions defense. They may even scrip their first 10 plays or so. Accordingly, you often see teams get early scores before the defenses make adjustments to slow down the opposing offense. What I have found is that if you can whether the initial offensive onslaughts, you'll usually be in pretty good shape. What you don't have to worry about are teams resorting to extraordinary measures to score before the end of the 1st half.

Overall, I found that the benefits of betting 1st half UNDERS outweighs the benefits of betting game UNDERS. And hey, it's been working for me, so I think I'll stay the course.

jimmydafreak

All-Star

Joined: Oct, 2003

Posts: 13864

Posted: Aug. 25, 2013 - 12:08 AM ET #71

Quote Originally Posted by WahooS:

Trying to keep my card short but like several of those that I'm not already with you

Best of luck bro

Here's a bit of advice; only follow my winners!!!

Good to see you posting again this season Wahoo. Feel free to drop in with comments and opinions anytime.

0

TRAIN69

Legend

Joined: Oct, 2002

Posts: 54496

Posted: Aug. 25, 2013 - 12:33 AM ET #72

OU/ULM O 59.5 interest you at all? I think both offenses will have the advantage.

Iii

0

ROVIN56

Veteran

Joined: Mar, 2011

Posts: 4525

Posted: Aug. 25, 2013 - 12:57 AM ET #73

Great take on LSU. Going forward perhaps we all oughta beware of feeding too greedily at the alabama trough..but over past few years it has been lucrative indeed...good to see you jimmy...and may those first halves continue to yield goal line stands and red zone turnovers!!!...as for new coaching staffs its a great point but i just have this feeling arkansas is gonna break from the gate strong this year with 4 winnable games and a good coach with plenty of support....

0

ronwoodjzs

Veteran

Joined: Nov, 2004

Posts: 2093

Posted: Aug. 25, 2013 - 7:43 AM ET #74

FREAK fantastic thread, a complete class act, BEST OF LUCK to you this season

0

Sabanade

Veteran

Joined: Mar, 2010

Posts: 1962

Posted: Aug. 25, 2013 - 11:15 AM ET #75

Quote Originally Posted by jimmydafreak:

If I understand your question correctly, I answered part of your question in the 1st post when I said that I like to only bet on known quantities. In other words, I'm betting on stable teams, or I'm fading unstable ones. That is true whether I'm betting a side or a total.

For example, I love the Temple/Notre Dame UNDER. In betting the UNDER, I am essentially betting on a known quantity, which is Notre Dame's defense. I like Notre Dame a lot in this game, but I think the line is very sharp. I'm not confident enough in the Notre Dame offense to score in the high 30s or 40s, which is what they would probably have to do to cover a 30-point spread. Because I lack confidence in Notre Dame's offense, and because I believe Temple will have a very difficult time scoring on Notre Dame's defense, I really like the UNDER. But as I said, the impetus of my play is my confidence in the Notre Dame defense, because Notre Dame's defense is a known quantity that I think will produce predictable results.

As far as betting UNDERS for the first half versus the game, there are some pluses and minus to both. There were a couple of times where I bet 1st half UNDERS where the game went OVER the total for the 1st half, but UNDER for the game. But I also had the reverse happen. I didn't track the results, but I think I came out ahead betting the 1st half UNDERS at the end of the season.

The biggest benefit to betting UNDERS for the first half only is that you avoid the hazard of the college OT rules. You also avoid teams that are losing resorting to desperate measures to score points at the end of a game, such as attempting onside kicks, and going for it on 4th down situations where they otherwise would punt the ball.

I think the draw back is that teams often enter the game with a very well-thought out game plan of how to attack to oppositions defense. They may even scrip their first 10 plays or so. Accordingly, you often see teams get early scores before the defenses make adjustments to slow down the opposing offense. What I have found is that if you can whether the initial offensive onslaughts, you'll usually be in pretty good shape. What you don't have to worry about are teams resorting to extraordinary measures to score before the end of the 1st half.

Overall, I found that the benefits of betting 1st half UNDERS outweighs the benefits of betting game UNDERS. And hey, it's been working for me, so I think I'll stay the course.

Sounds good, jimmy. I know you know your stuff and are very strategic in your thinking, of which I tailed you on several 1st H Unders last year which turned out very profitable. My main question is not based upon your theory and logic in betting these (I agree with you on these as well as TT U's), but more so on the viability of accurately predicting them the first week of the season vs. successive weeks when you have had a chance to watch them play? Thanks

0

Quote Originally Posted by jimmydafreak:

If I understand your question correctly, I answered part of your question in the 1st post when I said that I like to only bet on known quantities. In other words, I'm betting on stable teams, or I'm fading unstable ones. That is true whether I'm betting a side or a total.

For example, I love the Temple/Notre Dame UNDER. In betting the UNDER, I am essentially betting on a known quantity, which is Notre Dame's defense. I like Notre Dame a lot in this game, but I think the line is very sharp. I'm not confident enough in the Notre Dame offense to score in the high 30s or 40s, which is what they would probably have to do to cover a 30-point spread. Because I lack confidence in Notre Dame's offense, and because I believe Temple will have a very difficult time scoring on Notre Dame's defense, I really like the UNDER. But as I said, the impetus of my play is my confidence in the Notre Dame defense, because Notre Dame's defense is a known quantity that I think will produce predictable results.

As far as betting UNDERS for the first half versus the game, there are some pluses and minus to both. There were a couple of times where I bet 1st half UNDERS where the game went OVER the total for the 1st half, but UNDER for the game. But I also had the reverse happen. I didn't track the results, but I think I came out ahead betting the 1st half UNDERS at the end of the season.

The biggest benefit to betting UNDERS for the first half only is that you avoid the hazard of the college OT rules. You also avoid teams that are losing resorting to desperate measures to score points at the end of a game, such as attempting onside kicks, and going for it on 4th down situations where they otherwise would punt the ball.

I think the draw back is that teams often enter the game with a very well-thought out game plan of how to attack to oppositions defense. They may even scrip their first 10 plays or so. Accordingly, you often see teams get early scores before the defenses make adjustments to slow down the opposing offense. What I have found is that if you can whether the initial offensive onslaughts, you'll usually be in pretty good shape. What you don't have to worry about are teams resorting to extraordinary measures to score before the end of the 1st half.

Overall, I found that the benefits of betting 1st half UNDERS outweighs the benefits of betting game UNDERS. And hey, it's been working for me, so I think I'll stay the course.

Sounds good, jimmy. I know you know your stuff and are very strategic in your thinking, of which I tailed you on several 1st H Unders last year which turned out very profitable. My main question is not based upon your theory and logic in betting these (I agree with you on these as well as TT U's), but more so on the viability of accurately predicting them the first week of the season vs. successive weeks when you have had a chance to watch them play? Thanks

All Forums | College Football

About Us

Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials

Betting Guides

Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming

Sports Betting

US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps

Contests

Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools

The Covers community has

618,670

lifetime members worldwide

Join our community today

Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.

Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service

Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo

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.

Freak Pics!!! (Week 1)

Hot Forum Topics