Posted:
#26
The MAC is just 2-15 straight up since 2006. Now they're laying points.
Bowl thread 2010....
Posted:
#27
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:
Hey swoop - great question......
The units I post are all for the lines I post. I might have a unit more or less on a side because of a line I did or didnt get, but given the current line that is the way I would bet it.
For instance, I got Fresno at +3 +100, so I have an extra unit at that number and I got the ML at +125 for 1 unit. But at +105, I would bet 1 unit total.
Im sure I will also have lines go against me, and reduce my wager accordingly.
The way I see it is what is the point of posting unavailable lines? To prove to everyone that I win but you cant? Im not here to prove anything, just to try and give my opinion so that if someone buys in, they can do it too - and posting Fresno at +3 wouldnt really accomplish anything.
Perfectly clear... Thanks, and best of luck the rest of the way!
Posted:
#28
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:
Honestly, it is mostly a numbers play.
WVU defensive stats are off the charts. Even adjusted for strength of opponent they are off the charts. The only way I see NCS covering this one is to score 20+, and I just cant make a case for that - and my stats model supports it. I have NCS at a 82% probability to score 18 or less.
Most of this does not take in to the coaching issues you are talking about - and to be fair - they can be significant or immaterial. The thing is, I cant put a value on it. Year after year we have these, and to my knowledge overall they even out - teams with assistants coaching and teams with lame duck coaches do not do any better or worse than expected (to my recollection, maybe someone could provide some solid stats). I just dont know how to value it, so personally I ignore it as noise.
WVU 31 NCS 14
GL
I know the numbers support WVU slightly here, but do you see a reason to be concerned Tom O'Brien is coaching the other side. I believe he is 8-1 ATS as a bowl coach between NC St and BC. Also, I don't know if there's any reason for WV to be fired up for this game. They were looking at the BCS until the very last seconds of the UCONN game. Also take a look at the play disparity NC St holds, they don't have great yards per play stats on offense, but they hold on to the ball with a dink and dunk offense (I.e. move the chains with alot of short passes).
That's the key. The conference championship loser ATS like Van pointed out is about even, but to me, conference history in bowls means a lot. Thanks for that stat.
Posted:
#39
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:
MAC vs MWC is a mismatch. I also agree on NIU losing the MAC chmpnshp - not sure how they get up for this one.
Can someone provide a WL stat (and ATS stat) for teams that lose in the conference chmpnshp in their bowl game? Would be really interested....
Bowl teams coming off an upset loss to end the year are a solid 67-43-4 ATS if their opponent ended the season with a win. Looks like no reason to worry about NIU's upset loss to end the year. They're much more likely to be happy about being here than Fresno. Honestly, theyre probably happier about being in their shoes than Miami, OH's. They get to play more of a name team than Miami, OH does. Mid Tenn arguably worst team playing in the bowl. Fresno is somewhat notable.
Posted:
#40
Quote Originally Posted by gcnmoo:
Bowl teams coming off an upset loss to end the year are a solid 67-43-4 ATS if their opponent ended the season with a win.
you would consider this to be a more telling stat than the fact that the MAC is 2-15 SU in bowl games? i personally don't put any amount of stock into that 67-43-4 trend... it needs to be broken down further...
Posted:
#42
Quote Originally Posted by ApocalypseLater:
you would consider this to be a more telling stat than the fact that the MAC is 2-15 SU in bowl games? i personally don't put any amount of stock into that 67-43-4 trend... it needs to be broken down further...
you would consider this to be a more telling stat than the fact that the MAC is 2-15 SU in bowl games? i personally don't put any amount of stock into that 67-43-4 trend... it needs to be broken down further...
I don't think MAC being 2-15 SU in bowl games is all that relevant. ATS is more meaningful, MAC is usually gonna be dogs b/c theyre a weaker conference. Also, conference trends are for the most part irrelevant. Is TCU going to apply to all the same conference trends once they move to the big east next year. You need to look at each team individually. The one MAJOR concern with picking NIU is that the coaching staff has left. Interim coaches are 17-11 ATS since I started keeping track, but I'd have to go back and check how many coaches took both off/def coordinators with them like NIU did.
Posted:
#43
Quote Originally Posted by gcnmoo:
I don't think MAC being 2-15 SU in bowl games is all that relevant. ATS is more meaningful, MAC is usually gonna be dogs b/c theyre a weaker conference. Also, conference trends are for the most part irrelevant. Is TCU going to apply to all the same conference trends once they move to the big east next year. You need to look at each team individually.
so how would one look at Northern Illinois University individually in this regard?
i think you are rationalizing your pick, personally, but that is understandable... we all tend to do that... to say that the 2-15 SU record is irrelevant, but the ML is, in a game that is essentially a pick'em... makes no sense to me...
Posted:
#46
Quote Originally Posted by ApocalypseLater:
so how would one look at Northern Illinois University individually in this regard?
i think you are rationalizing your pick, personally, but that is understandable... we all tend to do that... to say that the 2-15 SU record is irrelevant, but the ML is, in a game that is essentially a pick'em... makes no sense to me...
so how would one look at Northern Illinois University individually in this regard?
i think you are rationalizing your pick, personally, but that is understandable... we all tend to do that... to say that the 2-15 SU record is irrelevant, but the ML is, in a game that is essentially a pick'em... makes no sense to me...
I'm looking at how NIU performed on the field this year. They performed better than Fresno did and most definitely better than past MAC Bowl teams. I still have no bet on NIU and likely will not, just don't understand why everyone on this covers board taking Fresno just because NIU is from the MAC.
Posted:
#48
Quote Originally Posted by gcnmoo:
I don't think MAC being 2-15 SU in bowl games is all that relevant. ATS is more meaningful, MAC is usually gonna be dogs b/c theyre a weaker conference. Also, conference trends are for the most part irrelevant. Is TCU going to apply to all the same conference trends once they move to the big east next year. You need to look at each team individually. The one MAJOR concern with picking NIU is that the coaching staff has left. Interim coaches are 17-11 ATS since I started keeping track, but I'd have to go back and check how many coaches took both off/def coordinators with them like NIU did.
Ive got the MAC at 6-17-1 since 2004 in bowl games ATS.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
Posted:
#49
Quote Originally Posted by gcnmoo:
I don't think the ATS record is all that relevant either. It is more relevant than the SU record just because they are often large dogs in bowl games (7+), so they aren't going to win very often.
Well, as someone who you love to debate on everything - I can attest that everyone has what they consider to be important to handicapping. You dont think confernce history is important, I do. You think your stat above about coming off of a loss is important, I dont.
Thats just the way it is but I get a feeling you are always looking to prove a point, or to win a debate. Certainly there are things that are black and white, but trend stats are not one of them. Just more ingredients in the recipe.
I am curious about your statement that N Illinois "performed better than Fresno did and most definitely better than past MAC Bowl teams." Lots of adjusted strength of schedule models (including mine) have N Ill very close to the bottom of the 120 ncaaf teams (mine 118, Steeles 119). I'm curious to hear what you see in N Ill "on field performance" that you find so convincing, other than running through the weakest conference there is.
And BTW - Im pretty sure N Ill would fit right in the middle of previous MAC bowl teams. This was a down year for the MAC (that is saying a lot), dont forget the Central Michigan teams with LeFevour as of late, and Ball St in 08 etc. This N Ill team has done nothing to distinguish itself even amongst a lousy MAC season IMO.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
Posted:
#50
[Quote: Originally Posted by vanzack]
Just in case anyone is interested.....
Conf championship losers are 20-17 ATS since 2000 in their bowl games.
The publics perception of a team can be based wayy to much off the last game a team played. Esp. a high profile upset.
Good luck this year Vanzack
Hot Forum Topics
