All Forums | College Football

Week 3 Money

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 21805
Posts: 122
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2009
Posts: 3470
Posted: #26
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:

Week 1 3-2 and Week 2 7-4 = 17-4


Love me some Bama math 

I went 6 and 2 week 1
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2014
Posts: 6111
Posted: #27
Quote Originally Posted by Tappy:


I went 6 and 2 week 1

No one in this thread cares other than you 
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2004
Posts: 25585
Posted: #28
Quote Originally Posted by DestroyThePitch:

Hey, where did you're friend, warcam, go??

Funny how you call Clemson winning and he magically vanishes...

Must be an Alabama (state) thing, dude?? They just don't like money I guess. Funny the similarity there 
 I don't have an issue with that guy, he comes in my threads last several years and posts something like that, he clearly doesn't like me which is perfectly fine, but why post in my thread?  

he hated Boom as well and several other guys I'm sure, I don't really care, I'm literally here to give my opinions and try my best to win money


if I wanted to fight with fans I'd join Twitter and have at it, I'm interested in winning money on college football, it's as simple as that

all the arguing is for the birds, there are honestly about 15 guys on this forum that I will even consider listening to, other than that, I just say what's up and wish them well

I wish warcam well and tappy well, we probably just need an SEC forum because no other fans are like those SEC fans on this forum

.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2014
Posts: 6111
Posted: #29
Wahoo 

This site and frankly, the internet itself would be more enjoyable if ppl took your attitude. 
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2002
Posts: 54672
Posted: #30
Quote Originally Posted by WahooS:

 I don't have an issue with that guy, he comes in my threads last several years and posts something like that, he clearly doesn't like me which is perfectly fine, but why post in my thread?  

he hated Boom as well and several other guys I'm sure, I don't really care, I'm literally here to give my opinions and try my best to win money


if I wanted to fight with fans I'd join Twitter and have at it, I'm interested in winning money on college football, it's as simple as that

all the arguing is for the birds, there are honestly about 15 guys on this forum that I will even consider listening to, other than that, I just say what's up and wish them well

I wish warcam well and tappy well, we probably just need an SEC forum because no other fans are like those SEC fans on this forum

Im sure Im one of those 15 


Now on with the plays!!!
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2015
Posts: 789
Posted: #31
Agree on just about all fronts here Wahoo. The only difference is I have Penn State in the Top 5 over USC. 

Keep up the good work. 

 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2004
Posts: 25585
Posted: #32
Quote Originally Posted by DestroyThePitch:

Wahoo 

This site and frankly, the internet itself would be more enjoyable if ppl took your attitude. 
 cheers on that, life is too short man, just enjoy the ride and don't get bent out of shape on the internet 

I've just watched millions get devastated by a natural disaster in my hometown, I'm feel fortunate to be around

I have opinions and strong ones at times but I keep them in my own thread, just trying to win


.
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2004
Posts: 25585
Posted: #33
SMU + 18.5

just don't feel like the QB play at TCU is elite enough to be laying this to a quickly improving rival, have to ride the SMU ats train, hoping they can make a game of it

LA TECH + 7

feeling like a straight up win is in order here, Wku missing Brohm badly, they looked horrible against a very mediocre Illini team, La Tech got buried as well but Miss St isn't a joke and they have a legit QB, I have to grab the points


.
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2004
Posts: 25585
Posted: #34
Wisconsin - 14

Byu is basically auto fade right now, the Badgers haven't performed well thus far but this should be a good time for them to get away as a team and come together, should be a blowout 
.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2010
Posts: 1634
Posted: #35
Quote Originally Posted by WahooS:

Wisconsin - 14

Byu is basically auto fade right now, the Badgers haven't performed well thus far but this should be a good time for them to get away as a team and come together, should be a blowout 

Would you play wisky at 16?
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2004
Posts: 25585
Posted: #36
chad77

yes I would 

for whatever reason my guy I'm putting plays in with has La Tech off the board, I see it available in most places but I'll just keep it as a lean at this point and look it over more since he's forcing my hand, it was my least favorite of the 3 anyhow


so only two official plays thus far

SMU +18.5 (missed good line here but not worried)

Wisc - 14



.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2017
Posts: 197
Posted: #37
with u on Tulane but u guys gotta watch on youtubue TULANE BAD JOKES CHALLENGE ,,,the are so bad there funny ,,all tulane players , seriously watch it
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2014
Posts: 2363
Posted: #38
Wahoooooos! Keep up the interesting writeups, objective insight and picks. Always great reading and I'll gladly win some money with you. BOL this week and the season
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2011
Posts: 5887
Posted: #39
SMU/TCU over should be tasty! Yeah this damn offshore work sure gets in the way of my capping!! Last year I had my only losing week in week 3- so I am treading lightly and I truly hate this card!
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2003
Posts: 3582
Posted: #40
"mediocre ILLINOIS team"… played over their heads last week or?
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2006
Posts: 4807
Posted: #41
Auburn defense is surely legit, but their offense is still pretty much the same crap offense that he was running when coaching Springdale Highschool... Stidham is stuck in a system not best suited for him... Gus needs a Cam Newton / Nick Marshall type QB to run Gus's gimmicky offense. For sure Stidham is a talented QB, and under someone else's scheme could play on Sundays, but under Malzahn, along with absolutely no protection from his offensive line, he will be lucky to even finish his college career..  Gus is already taking a lot of heat, and we are only two games into the season .


Best of luck this week 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2009
Posts: 3470
Posted: #42
You don't speak for this site Destroy... 
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2008
Posts: 613
Posted: #43
Quote Originally Posted by tideman:

Auburn defense is surely legit, but their offense is still pretty much the same crap offense that he was running when coaching Springdale Highschool... Stidham is stuck in a system not best suited for him... Gus needs a Cam Newton / Nick Marshall type QB to run Gus's gimmicky offense. For sure Stidham is a talented QB, and under someone else's scheme could play on Sundays, but under Malzahn, along with absolutely no protection from his offensive line, he will be lucky to even finish his college career..  Gus is already taking a lot of heat, and we are only two games into the season .
Best of luck this week 

Agree Auburn's offense was putrid against a top 3 Clemson defense. But the AU offense has a few differences under Chip that did not serve them well from the past offense.  First, AU used to throw it more to the flat, whether the wide out or to a back as a safety valve - they did none of that against Clemson.  Second, there was no HUNH - no 'pace' as it were, a Malzahn staple.  Third, the absence of the wheel route - AU used to run the play 4, 5 times a game with success, not once on Saturday. 

 All of this would have benefitted AU against Clemson because it gets the ball out of Stidham's hands quickly to receivers in space, and under high percentage circumstances.  The HUNH, too, I believe would have presented some opportunities to catch Clemson out of position, but it was never tried.  Finally, the one great, obvious flaw in Stidham's game is that he is SLOW as molasses - terrible footspeed - especially noticeable against a defense as fast as Clemson.  Their D-linemen were chasing him down from behind.  AU coaches should have recognized and called plays to get the ball out of his hand faster.  

You're correct the offense sucked and the coaches need to make adjustments; but there were have been some changes to the system since Chip has become OC and, at least in the Clemson game, did not benefit Auburn but hurt them IMO. We'll see if they learn and adjust. GL this season.

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2007
Posts: 6400
Posted: #44
curious to see how Clemson's D holds up this weekend. can't do much worse than they did last year. and won.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2009
Posts: 3470
Posted: #45
Quote Originally Posted by Skipster:

curious to see how Clemson's D holds up this weekend. can't do much worse than they did last year. and won.

Yeah, but last year they had Watson... this QB is not Watson...
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2011
Posts: 5887
Posted: #46
Tappy-

I am curious how 6-2 and 7-4 = 17-4? Bama math much? That would be 13-6.

I also believe the Clemson defense is the best in the country- their front four won the game for them against Auburn- if Auburn changes their play calling to help their QB, then Auburn will give Alabama fits- don't count them out just yet-
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2015
Posts: 41
Posted: #47
Go back and look at last years Clemson/L'Ville game. You will find that Clemson was up 28-10 at the half. The offense and defense was cruising. 1st drive after the half Watson throws to McCloud ball tips up and gets intercepted..L'ville turns it into a TD. Next drive was a 3 and out, L'ville scores. Clemson let them back into the game....Clemson had 3 turnovers inside their own 10 yard line with no points. L'ville lost way more than Clemson did on defense and on both lines of scrimmage. 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2015
Posts: 41
Posted: #48
Also , Clemson is better on defense this year. Better and deeper at CB, S, LB, DL 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2009
Posts: 3470
Posted: #49
Quote Originally Posted by blowoutgm:

Tappy-I am curious how 6-2 and 7-4 = 17-4? Bama math much? That would be 13-6.I also believe the Clemson defense is the best in the country- their front four won the game for them against Auburn- if Auburn changes their play calling to help their QB, then Auburn will give Alabama fits- don't count them out just yet-

I went 11-4 week 2...
 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2009
Posts: 3470
Posted: #50
Quote Originally Posted by blowoutgm:

Tappy-I am curious how 6-2 and 7-4 = 17-4? Bama math much? That would be 13-6.I also believe the Clemson defense is the best in the country- their front four won the game for them against Auburn- if Auburn changes their play calling to help their QB, then Auburn will give Alabama fits- don't count them out just yet-

You are basing that off what? Them holding Auburn to 6? A team with absolutely no QB? Louisville will light up that D Saturday.
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
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2025 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

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.