Louisville vs North Carolina Picks & Props
LOU vs UNC Picks
NCAAF PicksNorth Carolina ranks 114th in defensive havoc rate, creating disruption on just 12.5% of plays. That supports the case for Louisville having time to develop its passing concepts, including opportunities for Skinner off play action when defenders react to the Cardinals’ dangerous rushing attack. Louisville can move the ball in several ways here, and Skinner offers a less expensive route into its passing touchdowns.
LOU vs UNC Consensus Picks
LOU vs UNC Props
| GAME & PLAYER PROPS | PROJECTIONS | ANALYSIS | BEST ODDS | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
PASSING YARDS
UNC
B. Edwards Jr.
(QB)
u259.5 Passing Yards
242.10 UNDER
PROJECTION
-17.4
DIFFERENCE
23.79%
EV
|
|||||||
|
PASSING YARDS
LOU
L. Kienholz
(QB)
o235.5 Passing Yards
240.74 OVER
PROJECTION
+5.2
DIFFERENCE
15.03%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RUSHING YARDS
UNC
B. Hall
(RB)
o29.5 Rushing Yards
38.65 OVER
PROJECTION
+9.2
DIFFERENCE
27.2%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RUSHING YARDS
I. Brown
(RB)
u62.5 Rushing Yards
60.68 UNDER
PROJECTION
-1.8
DIFFERENCE
14.67%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RUSHING YARDS
UNC
D. June
(RB)
o47.5 Rushing Yards
51.32 OVER
PROJECTION
+3.8
DIFFERENCE
14.27%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RUSHING YARDS
LOU
K. Brown
(RB)
o54.5 Rushing Yards
54.95 OVER
PROJECTION
+0.4
DIFFERENCE
2.72%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEIVING YARDS
LOU
T. Hurry
(WR)
o39.5 Receiving Yards
61.44 OVER
PROJECTION
+21.9
DIFFERENCE
26.83%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEIVING YARDS
LOU
T. Richardson
(WR)
o59.5 Receiving Yards
77.78 OVER
PROJECTION
+18.3
DIFFERENCE
26.23%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEIVING YARDS
LOU
L. McCoy
(WR)
o49.5 Receiving Yards
62.97 OVER
PROJECTION
+13.5
DIFFERENCE
25.93%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEIVING YARDS
I. Brown
(RB)
o10.5 Receiving Yards
19.19 OVER
PROJECTION
+8.7
DIFFERENCE
25.35%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEIVING YARDS
UNC
J. Shipp
(WR)
o64.5 Receiving Yards
78.69 OVER
PROJECTION
+14.2
DIFFERENCE
25.09%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEIVING YARDS
UNC
T. Kekahuna
(WR)
o31.5 Receiving Yards
34.81 OVER
PROJECTION
+3.3
DIFFERENCE
25.07%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEPTIONS
LOU
L. McCoy
(WR)
o3.5 Receptions
4.10 OVER
PROJECTION
+0.6
DIFFERENCE
16.53%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEPTIONS
LOU
J. Skinner
(TE)
u2.5 Receptions
1.90 UNDER
PROJECTION
-0.6
DIFFERENCE
12.67%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEPTIONS
LOU
T. Richardson
(WR)
o4.5 Receptions
4.98 OVER
PROJECTION
+0.5
DIFFERENCE
7.06%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEPTIONS
LOU
T. Hurry
(WR)
o3.5 Receptions
4.57 OVER
PROJECTION
+1.1
DIFFERENCE
6.08%
EV
|
|||||||
|
RECEPTIONS
UNC
J. Shipp
(WR)
o5.5 Receptions
5.68 OVER
PROJECTION
+0.2
DIFFERENCE
-16.53%
EV
|
|||||||
- Proj. Diff: Low to High
- Proj. Diff: High to Low
- Proj. Rating: Low to High
- Proj. Rating: High to Low
- +EV: Low to High
- +EV: High to Low
Recent Form Trends
Cardinals are 5-0 ATS in their last 5 meetings.
Over is 5-0 in Cardinals last 5 games after allowing less than 20 points in their previous game.
Over is 5-0 in Cardinals last 5 games after allowing more than 450 total yards in their previous game.
Tar Heels are 4-0 ATS in their last 4 games as an underdog.
Over is 4-0 in Tar Heels last 4 games following a ATS loss.
Cardinals are 4-0 ATS in their last 4 games after allowing more than 280 yards passing in their previous game.
Tar Heels are 3-0-1 ATS in their last 4 games as a home underdog.
Tar Heels are 4-0 ATS vs. a team with a winning record.