JDF - I see you're taking the 1H under in the USC game 24.5...I've watched Whisky play a few times this year and they're not good on either side of the ball. I have a feeling SC destroys them and starts that early.
But, I'm just Bazookajoe and you're JDF!!!!!!!!!!!
0
JDF - I see you're taking the 1H under in the USC game 24.5...I've watched Whisky play a few times this year and they're not good on either side of the ball. I have a feeling SC destroys them and starts that early.
But, I'm just Bazookajoe and you're JDF!!!!!!!!!!!
Estes - I agree! Auburn 2H with him in there could be ugly. And Memphis is starting to show up on D. I already have game over (ugh!) and Memphis +3 (even)....Staying put.
0
Estes - I agree! Auburn 2H with him in there could be ugly. And Memphis is starting to show up on D. I already have game over (ugh!) and Memphis +3 (even)....Staying put.
JDF - I see you're taking the 1H under in the USC game 24.5...I've watched Whisky play a few times this year and they're not good on either side of the ball. I have a feeling SC destroys them and starts that early.
But, I'm just Bazookajoe and you're JDF!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm not a big ratings guy, but Wisconsin's defense does rate #1 in the nation in points allowed at 13.1 points per game. And yes, their offense is atrocious, thus the UNDER makes a lot of sense IMO. Obviously if you don't like it, lay off.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Bazookajoe7:
JDF - I see you're taking the 1H under in the USC game 24.5...I've watched Whisky play a few times this year and they're not good on either side of the ball. I have a feeling SC destroys them and starts that early.
But, I'm just Bazookajoe and you're JDF!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm not a big ratings guy, but Wisconsin's defense does rate #1 in the nation in points allowed at 13.1 points per game. And yes, their offense is atrocious, thus the UNDER makes a lot of sense IMO. Obviously if you don't like it, lay off.
Bazooka - Not sure what you're talking about on Wisky not being good on both sides of the ball. Third ranked defense overall and as Jimmy said, number one in the nation on fewest points allowed. I'd say that they must be pretty good on that side of the ball
Histrionic personality disorder. It's sad
0
I'm with Jimmy on the Wisky total
Bazooka - Not sure what you're talking about on Wisky not being good on both sides of the ball. Third ranked defense overall and as Jimmy said, number one in the nation on fewest points allowed. I'd say that they must be pretty good on that side of the ball
Bazooka - Not sure what you're talking about on Wisky not being good on both sides of the ball. Third ranked defense overall and as Jimmy said, number one in the nation on fewest points allowed. I'd say that they must be pretty good on that side of the ball
WM and JDF - understood, although I too am not a big ratings guy. But, you do have to give credit where credit is due and yes, Whisky's D does rank rather high on overall D. And, I'm not complaining either, as I certainly have benefited from JDF's picks! I don't know where Utah was ranked defensively when they played USC, however for some reason I see a lot in that game in this one is all.
No one has a crystal ball...
0
Quote Originally Posted by wmi799:
I'm with Jimmy on the Wisky total
Bazooka - Not sure what you're talking about on Wisky not being good on both sides of the ball. Third ranked defense overall and as Jimmy said, number one in the nation on fewest points allowed. I'd say that they must be pretty good on that side of the ball
WM and JDF - understood, although I too am not a big ratings guy. But, you do have to give credit where credit is due and yes, Whisky's D does rank rather high on overall D. And, I'm not complaining either, as I certainly have benefited from JDF's picks! I don't know where Utah was ranked defensively when they played USC, however for some reason I see a lot in that game in this one is all.
Talk to me Jimmy. Clemson / OU - 64 points. Over or under? I am worried that the line moved down to 63. Why?? Shouldn't it be like 75?
If the ACC is soft shouldn't OU be able to put up 40+? And as for the Big 12.. It certainly won't be OU to stop Clemson to score at least in the upper 20's.
What am I missing?
0
Talk to me Jimmy. Clemson / OU - 64 points. Over or under? I am worried that the line moved down to 63. Why?? Shouldn't it be like 75?
If the ACC is soft shouldn't OU be able to put up 40+? And as for the Big 12.. It certainly won't be OU to stop Clemson to score at least in the upper 20's.
First of all, I know what I said, but we must be careful when casting aspersions conference wide. While I don't think we can dismiss what happened in the UNC/Baylor game, I think Clemson has been strong at the point of attack. That's one of the reasons they are where they are.
That said, the question before us is how do they match up with Oklahoma. Both teams have QBs that have the athleticism and play-making ability to nullify a defense that is controlling the line of scrimmage.
The fan in me would love to see a Alabama/Clemson finale, but the bettor in me has to give the advantage to Oklahoma, and part of that is based upon Baylor's complete dominance over UNC in the trenches yesterday.
I really don't have a strong opinion on the total. I do think both defenses will prevent the offenses from going completely wild. At 63 I would lean OVER, but I could easily see a 31-28 type of score.
While I don't completely dismiss line moves, I mostly ignore them when handicapping games. If I'm confident in a play (like Alabama), line moves will not sway my opinion. If you liked OVER 64, don't let the line move sway you off of taking OVER 63.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Bazookajoe7:
JDF - you taking under 60 due to weather?
First of all, I know what I said, but we must be careful when casting aspersions conference wide. While I don't think we can dismiss what happened in the UNC/Baylor game, I think Clemson has been strong at the point of attack. That's one of the reasons they are where they are.
That said, the question before us is how do they match up with Oklahoma. Both teams have QBs that have the athleticism and play-making ability to nullify a defense that is controlling the line of scrimmage.
The fan in me would love to see a Alabama/Clemson finale, but the bettor in me has to give the advantage to Oklahoma, and part of that is based upon Baylor's complete dominance over UNC in the trenches yesterday.
I really don't have a strong opinion on the total. I do think both defenses will prevent the offenses from going completely wild. At 63 I would lean OVER, but I could easily see a 31-28 type of score.
While I don't completely dismiss line moves, I mostly ignore them when handicapping games. If I'm confident in a play (like Alabama), line moves will not sway my opinion. If you liked OVER 64, don't let the line move sway you off of taking OVER 63.
While I don't think UNDER 31 (1st Half) would be a bad play, I'm not playing it. Don't overreact to weather news. Football games usually last over three hours. Just because It's raining at the start of the game doesn't mean the sun won't be shining in the 4th quarter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Bazookajoe7:
JDF - you taking under 60 due to weather?
While I don't think UNDER 31 (1st Half) would be a bad play, I'm not playing it. Don't overreact to weather news. Football games usually last over three hours. Just because It's raining at the start of the game doesn't mean the sun won't be shining in the 4th quarter.
Jimmy,I've always found an edge when betting 2games from the same 2 different conferences.U can absolutely get edges by watching Baylor/NCar for Okla/Clemson..I think Oklahoma going beat Clemson soundly..I like Dabo,but I'd like to just hear Baby Huey STFU.
0
Jimmy,I've always found an edge when betting 2games from the same 2 different conferences.U can absolutely get edges by watching Baylor/NCar for Okla/Clemson..I think Oklahoma going beat Clemson soundly..I like Dabo,but I'd like to just hear Baby Huey STFU.
I think this is a really difficult assignment for inexperienced sophomore QB Jake Hubenak. How much of TAMU's offense will he be able run tonight? I think Louisville's ball-hawking defense will make life very miserable for Hubenak tonight.
I think TAMU's defense will keep them in the game, but I expect Louisville to prevail in the end.
0
Quote Originally Posted by poppingbands17:
I see your on UL. What's your thoughts on why UL?
I think this is a really difficult assignment for inexperienced sophomore QB Jake Hubenak. How much of TAMU's offense will he be able run tonight? I think Louisville's ball-hawking defense will make life very miserable for Hubenak tonight.
I think TAMU's defense will keep them in the game, but I expect Louisville to prevail in the end.
Jimmy,I've always found an edge when betting 2games from the same 2 different conferences.U can absolutely get edges by watching Baylor/NCar for Okla/Clemson..I think Oklahoma going beat Clemson soundly..I like Dabo,but I'd like to just hear Baby Huey STFU.
Who is Baby Huey?
0
Quote Originally Posted by warcameagle56:
Jimmy,I've always found an edge when betting 2games from the same 2 different conferences.U can absolutely get edges by watching Baylor/NCar for Okla/Clemson..I think Oklahoma going beat Clemson soundly..I like Dabo,but I'd like to just hear Baby Huey STFU.
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.