All Forums | College Football

Kansas at Virginia Tech (01/03/2008)

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 20282
Posts: 377
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2006
Posts: 1592
Posted: #351
The right side of the game is determined prior to the game via handicapping.  Watching or Monday morning quarterbacking is used for proving or disproving the initial assumption.

The right side WAS Kansas and in no way was VT.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2007
Posts: 1040
Posted: #352
Quote Originally Posted by Henry-Lilly:

This is the ACC champion? 

just goes to show how bad the ACC is... bowl results confirm it...

 

and i agree with peppto... why the fuck do you onside kick with 3 minutes to go after getting that impressive drive to pull within 3?  let your defense play... but once they lost the onside kick it was like waving the white flag...

this is the supposedly great Beamer, making an idiotic move like that???  sad...

KU was definitely the right play, because they were the better team from the better conference, with the better coach and the bigger chip on their shoulder... and i should have stuck to my original feeling on this game...

 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2007
Posts: 10502
Posted: #353
Backroads- yea, I know.  I'm just pissed off and shocked that a coach that's been around as long as Beemer is still making such bad decisions.  He's at least predictable to screw up a big game.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2007
Posts: 1040
Posted: #354
Quote Originally Posted by Henry-Lilly:

This is the ACC champion? 

just goes to show how bad the ACC is... bowl results confirm it...

 

and i agree with peppto... why the fuck do you onside kick with 3 minutes to go after getting that impressive drive to pull within 3?  let your defense play... but once they lost the onside kick it was like waving the white flag...

this is the supposedly great Beamer, making an idiotic move like that???  sad...

KU was definitely the right play, because they were the better team from the better conference, with the better coach and the bigger chip on their shoulder... and i should have stuck to my original feeling on this game...

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2007
Posts: 368
Posted: #355

LOL, Tex, the right side of a game is always on hindsight, it's saying that who had hte obvious better team. If you look at this game, VTech had the better team overall, defensively, really even offensively against Kansas. Sure they lost, but it was 100% in my opinion due to Beemer

You can't handicap a coach coming up with a terrible gameplan. If you watch this game over and over again, it's so evident that VTech has the better team, and that's the only thing a handicapper can do, bet the better team when the line is small enough.....It's hard to explain online but I hope some people understand what I'm saying

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2007
Posts: 368
Posted: #356
Ok I think my last post is a bit confusing, but I'm really hoping people can understand my point. When you bet a game before it starts and a line is 3 or under in a football game, you have to bet who you think has the better team, w/everything considered and who you think will play better. I honestly wholeheartedly think that with even a decent game plan, VTech wins by 7-10 pts in this game. It's just that Beemer didn't utilize his team's talent at all and cost them with costly calls and TOs and non-replay calls he made in this game
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2007
Posts: 1648
Posted: #357
Didn't see all of this, but what I saw showed VT didn't play with the same intensity.  Very disappointed in Beamer's preparation of this team.  VT wasn't a great team, but clearly better than KU.  Special teams mistakes (supposedly a strength), and spotting a team 17 points before deciding to fight back.  Congrats to the KU backers.  I expected them to play hard but didn't think VT would not realize they needed to match that, they aren't good enough to take anyone for granted.  ACC continues to be near the bottom of the BCS conferences.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2003
Posts: 5870
Posted: #358
"The house must go down; & the house must go down hard."
-bigeiii-

KU scores 1st? Yes. (winner)
Non Offensive TD? Yes. (winner)
1st Score a TD? Yes. (winner)
KU Qb LOW on 21.5 Completes? Yes. (winner)
KU Qb INT'ed? Yes. (winner)
SG INT'ed? Yes. (winner)
SG LOW on 15 Completes? Yes. (winner)
KU Qb rush attempts UP on 6.5? Yes. (winner)
No Score in the first 6:00? Yes. (winner)
TT UP on 9 Rushing Attempts (incorrect)
VT to score 1st in the 2nd-half? Yes. (winner)
1st score of the 2nd-half=TD? Yes. (winner)
VT SU? (incorrect)
VT Teased? (winner)
KU Teased? (winner)
Against VT in hoops today? (winner)


bigeiii
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2007
Posts: 1040
Posted: #359
Backroads... i understand what you're saying... but two problems... 1) you do have to factor in coaching, and beamer got manhandled by mangino... 2) Kansas was way under-rated and VT was way over-rated... read the first few posts on this thread... people were saying VT should be favored by 15-18, and everyone shouting about how Kansas hasn't played anyone... that was all garbage!  regardless of who they played, Kansas dominated their opponents, finishing 10-1 ATS coming into the orange bowl, finishing top 5 in scoring offense and defense...
 
the reality... VT comes into this game with that bullshit offense they are running, after Kansas has played against Big 12 offenses all year, and that Jayhawks defense was looking at the Hokies offense in that game and saying, "are you kidding?  this is a joke!" 
 
i bet VT, because i got swayed off my original feeling, and i watched that game... Kansas was the right side, no doubt about it!  in fact, the score does not indicate how one-sided the game really was, in my opinion...
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2003
Posts: 8330
Posted: #360
Kansas at the half

under


I got home in time to catch the rest of this game to cheer on V-Tech for a SU victory even if it would have cost me my under play it would have been nice for V-Tech at the least.

BJ & bigeiii sorry about your Hokies I truly & honestly wanted them to win at the end. They have nothing to be ashamed about they had a great season despite the tragedy. I really don't think anyone can ever overcome such a tragedy as that so that V-Tech team showed a lot of strong character throughout the entire season.

Props to V-Tech staff, students and alumni may God Bless all of you and your families

Aloha
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2007
Posts: 368
Posted: #361
What?? Give me a break, if you guys can factor how a coach is going to implement a specific game plan for a specific game after that many days off especially in college, you guys are much better bettors than I am
 
The score does not indicate how one sided the game was???? Did anyone else watch the same game I did with VTech crushing Kansas running the ball yet they failed to do it for 3/4 of the game (they only did it in the 2nd)?? Did I really not watch the same game??
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2007
Posts: 1040
Posted: #362
read the post right before my last post, and then go read the first post on this thread... that (and this thread in general) is why i have lost respect for these threads and the majority of opinions (handicappers) on this site... and its getting too hard to weave through the garbage to find a worthwhile opinion...
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2007
Posts: 368
Posted: #363
LOL, I actually think that most of you "old timers" on this site are very arrogant and think that your opinions somehow trump all the other opinions because you give "sophisticated" opinions about te games. Not saying all, like bigdaddy and CMJohnson but some of you really believe you word is liek gold on this site....
 
 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2008
Posts: 57
Posted: #364
long time reader, first time poster. 
 
I have not been this angry at a coach in many many years.  Obviously, the onsides kick was a stupid decision with over 2 mins and 2 timeouts.  However, I am more angry at what happened after the kick.  There was not one defensive play called that had more than 7 guys in the box and if you go back and look at each play, there was consistently 6 guys in the box with 5 guys out in coverage.  Are you freaking kidding me???  You let them pick up 2 more first downs to run the game clock out.  You put 8 guys in the box and go man and hope that they throw the ball and risk an int and or clock stopage.  My 3 year old neice would know that KS was goint to be running on every play and would crowd the box and bring the safties up.  I am just sickened by the stupidy.
 
On a diff note, been reading you posts for a long time big daddy and appreciate your insights. 
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2007
Posts: 10502
Posted: #365
Now Bigeii is claiming a win?  I don't think so.  Look at his original posts
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2003
Posts: 8330
Posted: #366
Quote Originally Posted by bigeiii:

"The house must go down; & the house must go down hard."
-bigeiii-

KU scores 1st? Yes. (winner)
Non Offensive TD? Yes. (winner)
1st Score a TD? Yes. (winner)
KU Qb LOW on 21.5 Completes? Yes. (winner)
KU Qb INT'ed? Yes. (winner)
SG INT'ed? Yes. (winner)
SG LOW on 15 Completes? Yes. (winner)
KU Qb rush attempts UP on 6.5? Yes. (winner)
No Score in the first 6:00? Yes. (winner)
TT UP on 9 Rushing Attempts (incorrect)
VT to score 1st in the 2nd-half? Yes. (winner)
1st score of the 2nd-half=TD? Yes. (winner)
VT SU? (incorrect)
VT Teased? (winner)
KU Teased? (winner)
Against VT in hoops today? (winner)


bigeiii


nice prop winners my friend
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2007
Posts: 10502
Posted: #367
Amen, Backroads.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2003
Posts: 5870
Posted: #368
Thx bigdaddy.


bigeiii
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2007
Posts: 1040
Posted: #369
good call, henry-lilly... my point exactly!
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2007
Posts: 1040
Posted: #370
Unofficial top 10 teams...
 
1) W Va
2) USC
3) LSU-OSU winner
4) LSU-OSU loser
5) Oklahoma
6) Missouri
7) Kansas
8) Tennessee
9) Va Tech
10) Michigan or Texas
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2007
Posts: 1233
Posted: #371
Backroads,

The better team won this game. VT did everything in this game they have done all season. Play very good defense, force turnovers, and make plays in the special teams. They did this, and they were beaten by a very solid team all around. KU is simply more balanced, and their QB was infinitely better. It's unfortunate that more people didn't see this coming, but I tried many times to alert people to the trap line. You're right that public fades don't always work out, but this bowl season they have been profitable. I am not trying to throw salt in any wounds here, but if you don't realize now that VT was a trap, you may find yourself on the wrong side of one of these again.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2004
Posts: 3917
Posted: #372
AND THEY COVERED AGAIN
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2002
Posts: 380
Posted: #373
Hey dipshit you forgot Hawaii.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2002
Posts: 380
Posted: #374
Hey dipshit you forgot Hawaii.
 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2004
Posts: 3917
Posted: #375

 


Prospect
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 371
Location: Florida
quote
Posted: 1/3/2008 5:14:51 PM

For all you with good analysis thank you. There is still some great info here. I agree with those picking VT for all reasons stated above and the fact that they deserve this after the terrible tragedy they suffered this summer.

GOOD LUCK HOKIES!

murph22  Talk about a FUCKIN  Dipshit.

Hawaii 10 Georgia 41

 

All Forums | College Football
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Office Pools
The Covers community has
810,221
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 30 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 - 2026 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.