|
|
#141
10-11-2007, 10:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: CFB Early Lines Thread (week of 10/8)
To put the ND/BC game into perspective, I had Cal -13.5 @ Colorado St earlier in the year and they failed to cover. (The same Colorado State that has yet to win this year and lost to SDSU at home last wknd.) Betting a home dog is never THAT bad an idea, even if it's ND.
|
|
#142
10-11-2007, 12:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: CFB Early Lines Thread (week of 10/8)
[ QUOTE ]
moreover, i think tennessee under fulmer to lack sufficient team speed, and the primary cause for their perennially disappointing results in the SEC. last year the vols enjoyed a relaxed schedule in the SEC, losing to ark, lsu, and fla., and beating vanderbilt(0 wins sec), kentucky(2 wins sec), s. caro.(3 wins sec), and alabama(2 wins sec). [/ QUOTE ] Lots of incorrect facts, and disagreeable opinions in the above quote.
|
|
#143
10-11-2007, 12:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: CFB Early Lines Thread (week of 10/8)
[ QUOTE ]
BTW--I'm definitely not as high on the Big11Ten as ESPN voters [/ QUOTE ] hahaha what the hell is the story behind this? Top Teams: 1. Illinois 2. OSU 3. Wisconsin 4. Michigan 5. Purdue 6. Indiana 7. Hawaii 8. LSU LOL?
|
|
#144
10-11-2007, 12:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: CFB Early Lines Thread (week of 10/8)
Just to expand on what facts are incorrect:
1. Vanderbilt won 1 SEC game last year. 2. Kentucky won 4 SEC games last year. 3. It is widely agreed that Tennessee had the toughest or 2nd toughest (behind UF) SEC schedule last year. Onto opinions. I guarantee I'm the biggest Tennessee fan on this forum. It's probably not close. That being said, speed never has been nor never will be the issue at UT. Fulmer, Cutcliffe, and Chavis breathe for speed. In fact, UT fans complain that they look at speed TOO much. Lately, they have not been able to TEACH these athletes to be the best football players. Speed is fine, still one of the fastest teams in the SEC. The problem at UT is not one thing, it's a multitude. Teaching isn't as good as it once was. Position changes are everyday things. Old-world schemes are still in place.
|
|
#145
10-11-2007, 12:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: CFB Early Lines Thread (week of 10/8)
[ QUOTE ]
dude, i said, handled, not "shut down"--the badgers stopped illinois' rushing attack (which is their principle weapon, nicht wahr?) [/ QUOTE ] ROFLROFLROFL You do realize Illinois averaged 6.6 yards per carry, right? That 6.6 ypc is their SECOND HIGHEST ypc of the season. Western Illinois did better against the Illini rush game. In no way, shape, or form in ANY universe did Wisconsin "handle," "stop," or "slow down," the Illini running game.
|
|
#146
10-11-2007, 01:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: CFB Early Lines Thread (week of 10/8)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Louisville +10.5 couldn't resist [/ QUOTE ] *pukes* [/ QUOTE ] Believe me, I understand the puke here - I threw up in my mouth a little when I placed it. But, as horribly, awfully bad as Louisville's defense has been, Harry Douglas should be back, and Brian Brohm + Harry Douglas = lots of points. Louisville still has one of the best offenses in the country, and any opponent for the remainder of the season will have to score with them to beat them, much less cover double digits. Cincy will probably have to score 50 to cover 10.5 - not saying they won't, but I have my doubts.
|
|
#147
10-11-2007, 01:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: CFB Early Lines Thread (week of 10/8)
[ QUOTE ]
To put the ND/BC game into perspective, I had Cal -13.5 @ Colorado St earlier in the year and they failed to cover. (The same Colorado State that has yet to win this year and lost to SDSU at home last wknd.) Betting a home dog is never THAT bad an idea, even if it's ND. [/ QUOTE ] That's the angle that concerns me the most.
|
|
#148
10-11-2007, 01:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: CFB Early Lines Thread (week of 10/8)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Louisville +10.5 couldn't resist [/ QUOTE ] *pukes* [/ QUOTE ] Believe me, I understand the puke here - I threw up in my mouth a little when I placed it. But, as horribly, awfully bad as Louisville's defense has been, Harry Douglas should be back, and Brian Brohm + Harry Douglas = lots of points. Louisville still has one of the best offenses in the country, and any opponent for the remainder of the season will have to score with them to beat them, much less cover double digits. Cincy will probably have to score 50 to cover 10.5 - not saying they won't, but I have my doubts. [/ QUOTE ] Wow - total on this game is 66 - team totals of 38-28? I gotta be thinking this has some value as well. If at gunpoint I would probably go over each of those. The Louisville offense and defense are both prominently involved.
|
|
#149
10-11-2007, 01:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: CFB Early Lines Thread (week of 10/8)
I also like LSU/Kentucky Under 54.5 - I had it pegged at 51 and it actually opened at 49.5 before rocketing up.
The Kentucky defense is still underrated, as I have previously said here and in SE - lately the UK offense/special teams has been giving the other team points which has covered up how (relatively) well the UK defense has been playing - they only allowed 342 yards against SC, but the UK offense gave the Gamecocks at least 14 of their 38 points. UK also allowed only 307 yards to Florida Atlantic, who then promptly rolled up 411 on the vaunted South Florida defense. Looking at team totals of 32 and 22.5, I lean under on both - as much as it pains me to say it regarding Kentucky. Kentucky will struggle in pass protection against LSU's front four (also an issue against SC), like they did last year in Death Valley when they were shutout (although they were missing Little and some other key guys for that game), and I don't know that Kentucky will be able to have the same success on the ground as they've been having against lesser defenses.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
