Posted:
#51
Thank Scal ??????
BOISE STATE @ WYOMING: Usually I say make a somewhat moderately sized play...
Posted:
#54
Quote Originally Posted by The Hawk:
I'd like to point out a couple of things Scal is using that you may wish to incorporate into your wagering:
I'd like to point out a couple of things Scal is using that you may wish to incorporate into your wagering:
1. Keep track of injuries. I use Don Best online, then go through my Phil Steele mag and redline the player if it's season ending, yellow highlighter if he can make it back during the season.
2. Motivation. With Houston screwing themselves, Boise State has now moved into position as the favorite "small" school with a shot at a decent bowl game, a place they've occupied before.....
Scal, keep up the good work
Don Best huh? I'll have to look into that Hawk.
Posted:
#56
Quote Originally Posted by Rolexsports:
I had Nevada plus 8 last week so I pushed. I knew getting 8 at home against the secondary of the Cowboys had a decent shot . Boise rolls.
I had Nevada plus 8 last week so I pushed. I knew getting 8 at home against the secondary of the Cowboys had a decent shot . Boise rolls.
I had Wyoming -8 and cringed every time Nevada passed. They could not be stopped! And this is NEVADA with a 2nd string QB we are talking about here!
Posted:
#59
Quote Originally Posted by chaloots:
When you bet games, ideally you want teams off losses, particularly bad ones or glaring ones. That team goes hard in practice all week and uses the next week to make up for it.
Boise comes in off a 'de facto' loss against BYU. A win in the box score and a loss in overall play, an 'escape job' as they say.
Two different situations. Last year Tulane was coming off an emotional win at Army and SMU just got crushed by Tulsa and had one win on the year.
This year, SMU is surging with 3 wins and beat No.11 ranked HOU while Tulane comes in on a losing streak. The conditions to post the game, and the coincident levels of confidence in each team, are vastly different from last year to this year.
I'll let my record speak to my angles therein.
1) Too bad you didn't take that angle on Texas when you wrote a 8 paragraph writeup about how Oklahoma was going to destroy them and name the score. Just another angle you use to fit your opinion without looking at the other side.
So you think that backdooring a number with 1:30 left in the game, like Texas did, PROVES an angle was wrong.
Ya see, I am looking at the other side. I've watched the Wyoming games necessary to cap this game. And I want to be clear: You will lose and their pass defense will be responsible.
2) Big difference in being confident or over confident. Like I said earlier there is no chance that Wyoming (who has never beaten Boise) is coming into the game over confident like you originally stated.
You don't understand the nuance of the confidence of which I speak.
When you bet games, ideally you want teams off losses, particularly bad ones or glaring ones. That team goes hard in practice all week and uses the next week to make up for it.
When you have a team like Wyoming, who simply doesn't experience long term win streaks, even 3 game win streaks, and bowl eligibility, you have a level of confidence, and rightfully so, in their season long accomplishment that brings their intensity levels down a notch or several, when those levels need to be sky high against a team like Boise.
Boise comes in off a 'de facto' loss against BYU. A win in the box score and a loss in overall play, an 'escape job' as they say.
This is psychological handicapping at it's core and is the main reason I haven't posted Tulane vs. SMU like last year.
Two different situations. Last year Tulane was coming off an emotional win at Army and SMU just got crushed by Tulsa and had one win on the year.
This year, SMU is surging with 3 wins and beat No.11 ranked HOU while Tulane comes in on a losing streak. The conditions to post the game, and the coincident levels of confidence in each team, are vastly different from last year to this year.
3)Of course Boise coaches and their players know they will not play for a National Championship, you can and flip it any way you want but them getting into the playoff is not happening no matter what.
Whatever you say. Even if they don't they can still say they DESERVED to play in it by remaining undefeated.
4)You were talking about how Rutgers defense was coming together last year and how they have improved with the coaching staff and you had a few stats to try and fit your argument but you neglected the fact that Rutgers gave up the most yard on average per play on defense.
They didn't give up the most YPP on defense. It was GAME 1 of the CFB season. How many times do I have to say this?
5) Like I said I wasn't knocking your pick, was just saying to be a little less bias in your write-ups and not come up with angles that don't exist.
Angles that don't exist...
That is correct, they don't exist. YOU create them.
Angles are essentially HYPOTHESES about the game and you test them through a write-up explaining your Hypothesis and a through a monetary bet.
I'll let my record speak to my angles therein.
Posted:
#60
Quote Originally Posted by bigvern1013:
Wyoming is not going to win this game. I am surprised to even hear someone say that.
Boise hangs 40+ unless there is a snow/sleet/rain w/40 mph winds in Laramie.
I agree with the pick and analysis. Barring 5 turnovers, this is a boat race and BSU has twin Mercs.
BSU by 28+
Thanks for the endorsement Vern.
Posted:
#61
Quote Originally Posted by njsupreme1:
To the Chaloots and the JFeltys of the world: Look, you guys are entitled to your opinions but why does it seem like every week you come on here with all of this criticism of Scal's picks then crawl back under your rocks when the guy hits yet another bet?? Even Scal would agree that dissenting opinions on games are good. But people like you are so malicious and arrogant about it. How bout being more humble when you are wrong?? People might respect you more and not rip you so much. But I am assuming you probably don't care because you both think you know everything anyway!
To the Chaloots and the JFeltys of the world: Look, you guys are entitled to your opinions but why does it seem like every week you come on here with all of this criticism of Scal's picks then crawl back under your rocks when the guy hits yet another bet?? Even Scal would agree that dissenting opinions on games are good. But people like you are so malicious and arrogant about it. How bout being more humble when you are wrong?? People might respect you more and not rip you so much. But I am assuming you probably don't care because you both think you know everything anyway!
No need NJ, this happens literally in every thread.
Posted:
#64
When you bet games, ideally you want teams off losses, particularly bad ones or glaring ones. That team goes hard in practice all week and uses the next week to make up for it.
Maybe you want your teams coming off tough losses, not me. Some teams don't recover from bad losses, some just develop bad habits.
Notre Dame is 1 example this year, they took a complete nose dive after the opening night loss to Texas. Too each his own. Like I said I good luck, we just differ in what we see sometimes.
BTW, don't lump me in with the haters and shiit talkers in your thread, that is not what I do. I enjoy your write ups and your perspective even if I disagree with some.
Posted:
#65
you HAd me at THE PICK: BOISE ST -13.5
write up as always a thing of beauty I honestly don't know how u catch every detail you are like bill bilichek of capping . I honesly if I had to make one pick to save my life would go with any of your pick instead of mine this write up is like pre game motivational speech I would go to war with this pick win lose draw this is really great you truly got a gift my frend thanks and go broncos
Posted:
#67
Quote Originally Posted by chaloots:
When you bet games, ideally you want teams off losses, particularly bad ones or glaring ones. That team goes hard in practice all week and uses the next week to make up for it.
Maybe you want your teams coming off tough losses, not me. Some teams don't recover from bad losses, some just develop bad habits.
Notre Dame is 1 example this year, they took a complete nose dive after the opening night loss to Texas. Too each his own. Like I said I good luck, we just differ in what we see sometimes.
BTW, don't lump me in with the haters and shiit talkers in your thread, that is not what I do. I enjoy your write ups and your perspective even if I disagree with some.
No it did not take a nosedive. In fact, you could have made a shi*load of money off of ND's despair.
They lost to Texas outright in a crushing away defeat and then destroyed Nevada at home with the cover.
They lost to Duke in one of the embarrassing home losses in their history and then covered against Syracuse going away the next game.
They lost to Stanford without Stanford scoring an offensive touchdown and they'll likely cover the pick'um tomorrow at home against Miami.
This is situational capping. You are not looking to win off ALL losses, just glaring ones. And Texas and Duke most certainly qualify. As does Stanford. The NC State game was played in a hurricane and was an anomaly.
Posted:
#68
Quote Originally Posted by risktaker:
you HAd me at THE PICK: BOISE ST -13.5
write up as always a thing of beauty I honestly don't know how u catch every detail you are like bill bilichek of capping . I honesly if I had to make one pick to save my life would go with any of your pick instead of mine this write up is like pre game motivational speech I would go to war with this pick win lose draw this is really great you truly got a gift my frend thanks and go broncos
And War is the name of the game when it come to the house.
They took my money for years. Now I will take theirs and I will take it x250/x500/x1000 standing behind me.
We're gonna get this one Risk.
Posted:
#69
Quote Originally Posted by BigPapa21:
bebetter1 in post 13 has some great insight. i would love to tail this guy with all the knowledge that he possess. A true leader of men. Thank you thank you thank you.....
bebetter1 in post 13 has some great insight. i would love to tail this guy with all the knowledge that he possess. A true leader of men. Thank you thank you thank you.....
I'm really happy for you that you define your self-worth on the amount of posts you have on an internet message board. Sadly, I don't have a whole lot of time to spend on here.
Enjoy the game!
Posted:
#71
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
Thank you for pointing out exactly what I accuse you of, you point out situations to build your case but ignore the exact scenario you describe in all of the Dame losses. You conveniently left out that Dame lost to Duke right after a loss to Mich St but you point out their wins off of other losses, obviously you can't handle constructive criticism and are unwilling to see other point of views. You clearly know everything and will spew nonsense that only benefits your case. It makes no sense to try and converse with you because you are defensive and clearly know everything and are never wrong.
No it did not take a nosedive. In fact, you could have made a shi*load of money off of ND's despair.
They lost to Texas outright in a crushing away defeat and then destroyed Nevada at home with the cover.
They lost to Duke in one of the embarrassing home losses in their history and then covered against Syracuse going away the next game.
They lost to Stanford without Stanford scoring an offensive touchdown and they'll likely cover the pick'um tomorrow at home against Miami.
This is situational capping. You are not looking to win off ALL losses, just glaring ones. And Texas and Duke most certainly qualify. As does Stanford. The NC State game was played in a hurricane and was an anomaly.
Truly hilarious how you post their wins after bad losses but neglet to point out the game after the Mich ST loss and then an excuse after the NC State loss which they followed up with another loss.
Good luck on all your plays, I will let you continue to impress the sheeps, you obviously can't handle anyone that doesn't pat you on the back when you post one sided views. Peace
Posted:
#73
Quote Originally Posted by chaloots:
Thank you for pointing out exactly what I accuse you of, you point out situations to build your case but ignore the exact scenario you describe in all of the Dame losses. You conveniently left out that Dame lost to Duke right after a loss to Mich St but you point out their wins off of other losses, obviously you can't handle constructive criticism and are unwilling to see other point of views. You clearly know everything and will spew nonsense that only benefits your case. It makes no sense to try and converse with you because you are defensive and clearly know everything and are never wrong.
Thank you for pointing out exactly what I accuse you of, you point out situations to build your case but ignore the exact scenario you describe in all of the Dame losses. You conveniently left out that Dame lost to Duke right after a loss to Mich St but you point out their wins off of other losses, obviously you can't handle constructive criticism and are unwilling to see other point of views. You clearly know everything and will spew nonsense that only benefits your case. It makes no sense to try and converse with you because you are defensive and clearly know everything and are never wrong.
Truly hilarious how you post their wins after bad losses but neglet to point out the game after the Mich ST loss and then an excuse after the NC State loss which they followed up with another loss.
Good luck on all your plays, I will let you continue to impress the sheeps, you obviously can't handle anyone that doesn't pat you on the back when you post one sided views. Peace
What's truly hilarious is that you don't even understand the basic concept of situational capping and responses of teams off certain losses.
And the Mich State loss to me, playing duke in the next game laying 21 was not a prime spot, especially with their defense.
But I won't be able to convince you because again, you can't even begin to understand the concepts I'm talking about here.
You are only trying to prove yourself right and that is all that matters to you.
Meanwhile, I'll do lengthy write-ups for free to give out winners and help others.
And you'll...well who knows what the hell you will do. I'm offering a winner in this thread and you likely will leave it on the wayside for some random pick you capped for 10 minutes. It might hit it might not and at the end of the day you may have just paid vig to the house, like the overwhelming majority of bettors.
Can't help ya. Tried. You can still bet Boise. It's up to you. I could care less.
Posted:
#75
Buddy, I have been doing this for 20+ years and bet a good amount of many with 4 books, not much you can teach me. Like I said good luck and I share my picks also as I watch and research as much as anyone. Read all you response to anyone who disagrees with you in any thread, never once have I seen you tell someone they make a good or valid point. I will let you be, continue to let the sheep blow you.
Hot Forum Topics
