@Glccskippy I agree and include UCF in that scenario . Gus sometimes finds a way to jazz up a good thing.
Yeah, Malzahn isn't in my coaching favorites leaderboard.....but, UCF has some tLent and Plumlee at QB.....they got 19 kids from the portal....and Kent St LOST 18 kids to the portal.....basically anyone with talent got the f*uck outta dodge. I think they have only 8 or 9 returning starters....I expect them to struggle moving the ball and stopping the Knights is not gonna be easy. Will be looking at the UCF first half and team total as well....really no reason they don't throw up 60.....
0
Quote Originally Posted by Coloneljim:
@Glccskippy I agree and include UCF in that scenario . Gus sometimes finds a way to jazz up a good thing.
Yeah, Malzahn isn't in my coaching favorites leaderboard.....but, UCF has some tLent and Plumlee at QB.....they got 19 kids from the portal....and Kent St LOST 18 kids to the portal.....basically anyone with talent got the f*uck outta dodge. I think they have only 8 or 9 returning starters....I expect them to struggle moving the ball and stopping the Knights is not gonna be easy. Will be looking at the UCF first half and team total as well....really no reason they don't throw up 60.....
Train any thoughts on the PSU WVU game? 20.5 seems a bit much for a nationally televised opener. I could see a 31-12 PSU win and a WVU cover. Thanks
Super tough game/line to cap for game 1. If I played this, which I probably won't, I would want 21 or more with WV as I concur the line looks a bit high....but I also think the Penn St D is gonna be solid so you're WV predicted total of 12 seems about right.....and hoping WV can play solid d and keep Penn st offense in check is a lot to ask....
GL
0
Quote Originally Posted by Coloneljim:
Train any thoughts on the PSU WVU game? 20.5 seems a bit much for a nationally televised opener. I could see a 31-12 PSU win and a WVU cover. Thanks
Super tough game/line to cap for game 1. If I played this, which I probably won't, I would want 21 or more with WV as I concur the line looks a bit high....but I also think the Penn St D is gonna be solid so you're WV predicted total of 12 seems about right.....and hoping WV can play solid d and keep Penn st offense in check is a lot to ask....
Not sure why this line isn't at least 14. Nothing really changes with the Army offense. Its basic but hard to handle. Sure, they'll have some new faces, but simple schemes and repetition are key. ULM has proven they can't handle the triple option. They would have to devote all summer to this game if they wanted to defend it properly. It won't happen. Their offense also loses its QB amongst others.....meanwhile, the Army D has done nothing but improve over the last few years. They should be good enough to force a few 3 & outs and a couple turnovers....which will spell doom.
0
Add:
Army -9.5 (-120)
Not sure why this line isn't at least 14. Nothing really changes with the Army offense. Its basic but hard to handle. Sure, they'll have some new faces, but simple schemes and repetition are key. ULM has proven they can't handle the triple option. They would have to devote all summer to this game if they wanted to defend it properly. It won't happen. Their offense also loses its QB amongst others.....meanwhile, the Army D has done nothing but improve over the last few years. They should be good enough to force a few 3 & outs and a couple turnovers....which will spell doom.
Add: Army -9.5 (-120) Not sure why this line isn't at least 14. Nothing really changes with the Army offense. Its basic but hard to handle. Sure, they'll have some new faces, but simple schemes and repetition are key. ULM has proven they can't handle the triple option. They would have to devote all summer to this game if they wanted to defend it properly. It won't happen. Their offense also loses its QB amongst others.....meanwhile, the Army D has done nothing but improve over the last few years. They should be good enough to force a few 3 & outs and a couple turnovers....which will spell doom.
Army is 37-119 away so they should play careful to insure a rare road win.
Since 1996 using this formula (AF and line>-17 and line<=-3 and season>1996) they are 3-13 ATS. They are just a bad road team with a bad strategy laying points away. They do much better laying <=-17 points against inferior opponents.
Nothing is ever in the bank until it is in the bank
0
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:
Add: Army -9.5 (-120) Not sure why this line isn't at least 14. Nothing really changes with the Army offense. Its basic but hard to handle. Sure, they'll have some new faces, but simple schemes and repetition are key. ULM has proven they can't handle the triple option. They would have to devote all summer to this game if they wanted to defend it properly. It won't happen. Their offense also loses its QB amongst others.....meanwhile, the Army D has done nothing but improve over the last few years. They should be good enough to force a few 3 & outs and a couple turnovers....which will spell doom.
Army is 37-119 away so they should play careful to insure a rare road win.
Since 1996 using this formula (AF and line>-17 and line<=-3 and season>1996) they are 3-13 ATS. They are just a bad road team with a bad strategy laying points away. They do much better laying <=-17 points against inferior opponents.
UDMLP UConn Florida Nebraska Northern ILL North Texas Colorado St S Bama 10,000-1 with round robins of 5 & 6 teamers in effect as always. Asking a lot for a small slate on Thursday for sure.....2/3 would be cool heading into saturday.... Will dabble in another come Friday probably
What does this mean?
0
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:
UDMLP UConn Florida Nebraska Northern ILL North Texas Colorado St S Bama 10,000-1 with round robins of 5 & 6 teamers in effect as always. Asking a lot for a small slate on Thursday for sure.....2/3 would be cool heading into saturday.... Will dabble in another come Friday probably
Quote Originally Posted by Coloneljim: @Glccskippy I agree and include UCF in that scenario . Gus sometimes finds a way to jazz up a good thing.Yeah, Malzahn isn't in my coaching favorites leaderboard.....but, UCF has some tLent and Plumlee at QB.....they got 19 kids from the portal....and Kent St LOST 18 kids to the portal.....basically anyone with talent got the f*uck outta dodge. I think they have only 8 or 9 returning starters....I expect them to struggle moving the ball and stopping the Knights is not gonna be easy. Will be looking at the UCF first half and team total as well....really no reason they don't throw up 60.....
Yeah I think ucf gets the over by themselves...... Kent state is the worst team in college...... them and umass
0
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:
Quote Originally Posted by Coloneljim: @Glccskippy I agree and include UCF in that scenario . Gus sometimes finds a way to jazz up a good thing.Yeah, Malzahn isn't in my coaching favorites leaderboard.....but, UCF has some tLent and Plumlee at QB.....they got 19 kids from the portal....and Kent St LOST 18 kids to the portal.....basically anyone with talent got the f*uck outta dodge. I think they have only 8 or 9 returning starters....I expect them to struggle moving the ball and stopping the Knights is not gonna be easy. Will be looking at the UCF first half and team total as well....really no reason they don't throw up 60.....
Yeah I think ucf gets the over by themselves...... Kent state is the worst team in college...... them and umass
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69: Add: Army -9.5 (-120) Not sure why this line isn't at least 14. Nothing really changes with the Army offense. Its basic but hard to handle. Sure, they'll have some new faces, but simple schemes and repetition are key. ULM has proven they can't handle the triple option. They would have to devote all summer to this game if they wanted to defend it properly. It won't happen. Their offense also loses its QB amongst others.....meanwhile, the Army D has done nothing but improve over the last few years. They should be good enough to force a few 3 & outs and a couple turnovers....which will spell doom. Army is 37-119 away so they should play careful to insure a rare road win. Since 1996 using this formula (AF and line>-17 and line<=-3 and season>1996) they are 3-13 ATS. They are just a bad road team with a bad strategy laying points away. They do much better laying <=-17 points against inferior opponents.
I dont use historical trends for capping purposes....at least not 25 years worth when the game has changed dramatically since the mid 90s. Sure, Army was bad from 1996-2016.....only had 1 or 2 winning seasons....so that will skew a lot of stats when you throw 2 decades of poor outcomes in the mix. Last 7 years under Monken they only had 1 bad year. Their defense has become and asset as opposed to a liability. They get smart, tough kids who stay several years in one place. Service academies are pretty much immune to the new cfb world of paying players and the portal. Consistency is going to be a rare commodity and thus will be more valuable than ever moving forward. Could Army suck and lose straight up on the road? Absolutely. They still gotta show up and execute. I'm banking they are gonna be more prepared than whatever ragtag bunch ULM trots out there in 2023.....if this was 2003 maybe not.....
0
Quote Originally Posted by spottie2935:
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69: Add: Army -9.5 (-120) Not sure why this line isn't at least 14. Nothing really changes with the Army offense. Its basic but hard to handle. Sure, they'll have some new faces, but simple schemes and repetition are key. ULM has proven they can't handle the triple option. They would have to devote all summer to this game if they wanted to defend it properly. It won't happen. Their offense also loses its QB amongst others.....meanwhile, the Army D has done nothing but improve over the last few years. They should be good enough to force a few 3 & outs and a couple turnovers....which will spell doom. Army is 37-119 away so they should play careful to insure a rare road win. Since 1996 using this formula (AF and line>-17 and line<=-3 and season>1996) they are 3-13 ATS. They are just a bad road team with a bad strategy laying points away. They do much better laying <=-17 points against inferior opponents.
I dont use historical trends for capping purposes....at least not 25 years worth when the game has changed dramatically since the mid 90s. Sure, Army was bad from 1996-2016.....only had 1 or 2 winning seasons....so that will skew a lot of stats when you throw 2 decades of poor outcomes in the mix. Last 7 years under Monken they only had 1 bad year. Their defense has become and asset as opposed to a liability. They get smart, tough kids who stay several years in one place. Service academies are pretty much immune to the new cfb world of paying players and the portal. Consistency is going to be a rare commodity and thus will be more valuable than ever moving forward. Could Army suck and lose straight up on the road? Absolutely. They still gotta show up and execute. I'm banking they are gonna be more prepared than whatever ragtag bunch ULM trots out there in 2023.....if this was 2003 maybe not.....
I am not on the game so I get your point, but I have 0 faith in Army bucking trends with a line of -10. Its a miserable road team playing a miserable team.
As always wish you the best.
Nothing is ever in the bank until it is in the bank
0
@TRAIN69
I am not on the game so I get your point, but I have 0 faith in Army bucking trends with a line of -10. Its a miserable road team playing a miserable team.
Add: Army -9.5 (-120) Not sure why this line isn't at least 14. Nothing really changes with the Army offense. Its basic but hard to handle. Sure, they'll have some new faces, but simple schemes and repetition are key. ULM has proven they can't handle the triple option. They would have to devote all summer to this game if they wanted to defend it properly. It won't happen. Their offense also loses its QB amongst others.....meanwhile, the Army D has done nothing but improve over the last few years. They should be good enough to force a few 3 & outs and a couple turnovers....which will spell doom.
brother...not questioning your play, but the army offense is undergoing a massive overhaul. they are going away from the inverted triple option out of the flexbone
X X X X X X X
X X X
X
AND moving to a shotgun based spread option, with some dive, speed option, zone read, passing etc.
X X X X X X X
X X
X X
COULD BE VASTLY DIFFERENT
Until the wallet is full.
1
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:
Add: Army -9.5 (-120) Not sure why this line isn't at least 14. Nothing really changes with the Army offense. Its basic but hard to handle. Sure, they'll have some new faces, but simple schemes and repetition are key. ULM has proven they can't handle the triple option. They would have to devote all summer to this game if they wanted to defend it properly. It won't happen. Their offense also loses its QB amongst others.....meanwhile, the Army D has done nothing but improve over the last few years. They should be good enough to force a few 3 & outs and a couple turnovers....which will spell doom.
brother...not questioning your play, but the army offense is undergoing a massive overhaul. they are going away from the inverted triple option out of the flexbone
X X X X X X X
X X X
X
AND moving to a shotgun based spread option, with some dive, speed option, zone read, passing etc.
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69: Add: Army -9.5 (-120) Not sure why this line isn't at least 14. Nothing really changes with the Army offense. Its basic but hard to handle. Sure, they'll have some new faces, but simple schemes and repetition are key. ULM has proven they can't handle the triple option. They would have to devote all summer to this game if they wanted to defend it properly. It won't happen. Their offense also loses its QB amongst others.....meanwhile, the Army D has done nothing but improve over the last few years. They should be good enough to force a few 3 & outs and a couple turnovers....which will spell doom. brother...not questioning your play, but the army offense is undergoing a massive overhaul. they are going away from the inverted triple option out of the flexbone X X X X X X X X X X X AND moving to a shotgun based spread option, with some dive, speed option, zone read, passing etc. X X X X X X X X X X X COULD BE VASTLY DIFFERENT
All good. They will be run heavy regardless, and them throwing out things nobody has seen from them can't be good for the opponent. Here's Thatcher (new OC) quote " its still a triple option scheme....theres still a dive/read guy and a pitch read guy"....the look will change (being in shotgun more), but the fundamentals won't change.
0
Quote Originally Posted by steponaduck:
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69: Add: Army -9.5 (-120) Not sure why this line isn't at least 14. Nothing really changes with the Army offense. Its basic but hard to handle. Sure, they'll have some new faces, but simple schemes and repetition are key. ULM has proven they can't handle the triple option. They would have to devote all summer to this game if they wanted to defend it properly. It won't happen. Their offense also loses its QB amongst others.....meanwhile, the Army D has done nothing but improve over the last few years. They should be good enough to force a few 3 & outs and a couple turnovers....which will spell doom. brother...not questioning your play, but the army offense is undergoing a massive overhaul. they are going away from the inverted triple option out of the flexbone X X X X X X X X X X X AND moving to a shotgun based spread option, with some dive, speed option, zone read, passing etc. X X X X X X X X X X X COULD BE VASTLY DIFFERENT
All good. They will be run heavy regardless, and them throwing out things nobody has seen from them can't be good for the opponent. Here's Thatcher (new OC) quote " its still a triple option scheme....theres still a dive/read guy and a pitch read guy"....the look will change (being in shotgun more), but the fundamentals won't change.
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69: UDMLP UConn Florida Nebraska Northern ILL North Texas Colorado St S Bama 10,000-1 with round robins of 5 & 6 teamers in effect as always. Asking a lot for a small slate on Thursday for sure.....2/3 would be cool heading into saturday.... Will dabble in another come Friday probably What does this mean?
UDMLP stands for UnderDog ML Parlay....so its all those teams parlayed on the ML with round robins as well (so if its a 7 team parlay, bet all 5 and 6 team combos).....
0
Quote Originally Posted by Whodat0921:
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69: UDMLP UConn Florida Nebraska Northern ILL North Texas Colorado St S Bama 10,000-1 with round robins of 5 & 6 teamers in effect as always. Asking a lot for a small slate on Thursday for sure.....2/3 would be cool heading into saturday.... Will dabble in another come Friday probably What does this mean?
UDMLP stands for UnderDog ML Parlay....so its all those teams parlayed on the ML with round robins as well (so if its a 7 team parlay, bet all 5 and 6 team combos).....
Sweet!! I'm always betting RR too. Been kicking my ass in MLB, but I keep going back haha! Thanks for the picks! I'll post mine, if/when I start winning. Haven't been on covers since March Madness, but come back for the football. Here's to a great season!
0
@TRAIN69
Sweet!! I'm always betting RR too. Been kicking my ass in MLB, but I keep going back haha! Thanks for the picks! I'll post mine, if/when I start winning. Haven't been on covers since March Madness, but come back for the football. Here's to a great season!
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.
Hot Forum Topics
