Good day fellow gamblers! Excellent day for a wager or two!!! Today I capped my total of the year after crunching numbers for more than an hour. I don't know how much any one of you spends on one game. I used my normal system, checked it against my old one and turned it around to get different reads on it. This one turned out the same or close every time. This line opened at 61 and is as high as 68.5 at some books. We look for value, I have been gambling for so long, I do not believe in LOCKS! This is an excellent bet, the best value I have seen in the bowls (I am 5-1) so far. The Motor City Bowl Total:
Florida Atlantic/Central Michigan Under 68.5
Line from Bet.Cris, will give locals lines at noon. GLTA!!! Crush the books!!! ATLSLIM
Florida Atlantic/Central Michigan Under 68.5
Line from Bet.Cris, will give locals lines at noon. GLTA!!! Crush the books!!! ATLSLIM
ATLSLIM,
My excel sheet which crunches numbers for me says the same thing. Under the way to go.
The line definitely has value on the under when you look from a stats perspective. I mean... even if you don't get fancy and you look at this game from the basic premise that FAU averages 25 points per game on offense and Central Michigan averages 30. Or FAU gives up 29, and Central Mich gives up 31. That's both teams average 55 offensively and 61 defensively. There arent many systems in the world that should point over here.
No matter how you crunch the numbers it will show value on the under.
The thing though here is the human element, IMO. When you get two offenses together that have very good junior QBs, offensive minded coaches, that can't run the ball and they mostly rely on the pass, and both pass defenses are horrible and both teams know they will have to score to win, you get a snowball effect - which is what happened in last years Motor City Bowl, the 2nd highest scoring total in NCAA Bowl History.
I love betting unders, I HATE betting overs, and I tried to find every reason under the sun to take the under. But experience has told me this seems like one of those games where you will see the snowball effect on offense - something no stat or number crunching can predict.
I could see this game turning into an under fest if one of these teams could run the ball, grind out some clock and play a little D, that is an overs worst nightmare, but neither team can keep it on the ground and neither team can D up. Neither team is an Auburn or Arizona type team. This should be a pinball match.
But thats why they play the games. Thanks for posting, GL.
My excel sheet which crunches numbers for me says the same thing. Under the way to go.
The line definitely has value on the under when you look from a stats perspective. I mean... even if you don't get fancy and you look at this game from the basic premise that FAU averages 25 points per game on offense and Central Michigan averages 30. Or FAU gives up 29, and Central Mich gives up 31. That's both teams average 55 offensively and 61 defensively. There arent many systems in the world that should point over here.
No matter how you crunch the numbers it will show value on the under.
The thing though here is the human element, IMO. When you get two offenses together that have very good junior QBs, offensive minded coaches, that can't run the ball and they mostly rely on the pass, and both pass defenses are horrible and both teams know they will have to score to win, you get a snowball effect - which is what happened in last years Motor City Bowl, the 2nd highest scoring total in NCAA Bowl History.
I love betting unders, I HATE betting overs, and I tried to find every reason under the sun to take the under. But experience has told me this seems like one of those games where you will see the snowball effect on offense - something no stat or number crunching can predict.
I could see this game turning into an under fest if one of these teams could run the ball, grind out some clock and play a little D, that is an overs worst nightmare, but neither team can keep it on the ground and neither team can D up. Neither team is an Auburn or Arizona type team. This should be a pinball match.
But thats why they play the games. Thanks for posting, GL.
Mr. Boxslayer, so true. Absent in much of my handicapping are the intangibles. Such as the human element, including things such as revenge,suspensions, etc. I also realize that Bowl games are balls to the wall, everything goes, offensive trick play, go on 4th down, MF ers! I know that Vegas knows this and people know this. Gamblers still like that damn Over and 2 offensive teams in a bowl, I believe, Over players are going to have to pay the price , value wise, on the line. I see 61-62 points maybe, not 68.5. Thank you for your input, you are one of the best around here(I been here 4 years)especially on Bowl games. I will probably reconsider my wager because of your input. Best of luck!! ATLSLIM
food for thought
QUOTE: I could see this game turning into an under fest if one of these teams could run the ball, grind out some clock
I'm just commenting and not attacking please understand that. Just offering some food for thought on a fatal flaw most make with totals, not making application in the analysis in this game, but in general. So what I am about to add has nothing to do with this game, but has everything to do with totals.
I often see posts that are "pro" under, and I'll bet 90% of them include, statements such as running the ball to grind out the clock, so the game will go under.
FACT: The clock runs after a completed pass as well as after a completed run in college.
FACT: Running teams don't influence the total going over or under, in fact teams that have success running the ball, tend to play more overs than unders!
Here is the proof.
The top 5 teams in rushing yardage the last 3 years have produced the following results in OVER vs under games
101-74 ATS 58% to the OVER.
A team that runs the ball with success, or passes the ball with success, has nothing to do with the total going over or under!
The 2005-06 Texas Longhorns had the 3rd best rushing attack in the country 273.8 yards a game, and played to 4 totals in the 60s 3 went over 1 went under. They played to 1 toatl in the 70s it went over. Their season was 11 overs 1 under.
How many of those clock eating running plays that chewed up the clock produced unders?
Passing drives consume in many cases, an equal amount of time as running drives, mix with a pass or 2.
If this were the case then Navy who for years throws 10 passes or less a game would always play under.
NAVY 2007-08:
13 games, they threw 132 passes or 10.3 per game
AVG POINTS IN THEIR GAMES: 75.7
they played a game where they threw 6 passes, but 136 points were scored
Another where they threw 8 and 111 points were scored
Yet everytime they touched the ball, they were consuming the clock with their running game, it makes no difference!
QUOTE: I could see this game turning into an under fest if one of these teams could run the ball, grind out some clock
I'm just commenting and not attacking please understand that. Just offering some food for thought on a fatal flaw most make with totals, not making application in the analysis in this game, but in general. So what I am about to add has nothing to do with this game, but has everything to do with totals.
I often see posts that are "pro" under, and I'll bet 90% of them include, statements such as running the ball to grind out the clock, so the game will go under.
FACT: The clock runs after a completed pass as well as after a completed run in college.
FACT: Running teams don't influence the total going over or under, in fact teams that have success running the ball, tend to play more overs than unders!
Here is the proof.
The top 5 teams in rushing yardage the last 3 years have produced the following results in OVER vs under games
101-74 ATS 58% to the OVER.
A team that runs the ball with success, or passes the ball with success, has nothing to do with the total going over or under!
The 2005-06 Texas Longhorns had the 3rd best rushing attack in the country 273.8 yards a game, and played to 4 totals in the 60s 3 went over 1 went under. They played to 1 toatl in the 70s it went over. Their season was 11 overs 1 under.
How many of those clock eating running plays that chewed up the clock produced unders?
Passing drives consume in many cases, an equal amount of time as running drives, mix with a pass or 2.
If this were the case then Navy who for years throws 10 passes or less a game would always play under.
NAVY 2007-08:
13 games, they threw 132 passes or 10.3 per game
AVG POINTS IN THEIR GAMES: 75.7
they played a game where they threw 6 passes, but 136 points were scored
Another where they threw 8 and 111 points were scored
Yet everytime they touched the ball, they were consuming the clock with their running game, it makes no difference!
My take on this game was back when the total was 63.
I'll show you my take on the game played on the 24th, it will at least offer some insight's as to what to look for in terms of scoring and choosing a side:
When looking at the stats this Notre Dame team put up, it would be hard to suggest they are a good offensive team, but they are much better than the season stats say, and here is why. Notre Dame was way over-matched vs the top teams on their schedule. They played 3 games vs teams that are playing in Bowls on New Year's Day or after. Those 3 teams held Notre Dame to a combined 10 points and those teams ranked #1,#6, and #31 defensively. The Fighting Irish averaged 29.1ppg vs the other 9 teams on their schedule, and never scored less than 21. Those 9 games included 3 other Bowl teams, Pittsburgh,North Carolina, and Navy. They averaged 28ppg vs those teams, and those teams have anaverage defensive rank of #49, which is better than Hawaii's #59th ranked defense. Hawaii put up some big offensive games, but look who they were against. Their 49 was against a #116 ranked Idaho defense, and their 42 was against a #77 N. Mexico St. defense. Their 38 was against a #92 Nevada defense. Their 32 was against a #89 Fresno St. defense. There was noone else on their schedule they scored more than 24 against, and that includes games vs #109,#100, and #80 ranked defense. They spent most of their season against defenses that ranked in the bottom 3rd of the NCAA's 120 teams. Notre Dame is ranked #39 against a tougher schedule. Despite the weak defenses Hawaii faced they were sacked 38 times, the 5th most in NCAA football this season. They scored 13ppg against defenses in the upper half of the NCAA. I look for Notre Dame to win this game by a good margin, and will back them in this one.
I'll show you my take on the game played on the 24th, it will at least offer some insight's as to what to look for in terms of scoring and choosing a side:
When looking at the stats this Notre Dame team put up, it would be hard to suggest they are a good offensive team, but they are much better than the season stats say, and here is why. Notre Dame was way over-matched vs the top teams on their schedule. They played 3 games vs teams that are playing in Bowls on New Year's Day or after. Those 3 teams held Notre Dame to a combined 10 points and those teams ranked #1,#6, and #31 defensively. The Fighting Irish averaged 29.1ppg vs the other 9 teams on their schedule, and never scored less than 21. Those 9 games included 3 other Bowl teams, Pittsburgh,North Carolina, and Navy. They averaged 28ppg vs those teams, and those teams have anaverage defensive rank of #49, which is better than Hawaii's #59th ranked defense. Hawaii put up some big offensive games, but look who they were against. Their 49 was against a #116 ranked Idaho defense, and their 42 was against a #77 N. Mexico St. defense. Their 38 was against a #92 Nevada defense. Their 32 was against a #89 Fresno St. defense. There was noone else on their schedule they scored more than 24 against, and that includes games vs #109,#100, and #80 ranked defense. They spent most of their season against defenses that ranked in the bottom 3rd of the NCAA's 120 teams. Notre Dame is ranked #39 against a tougher schedule. Despite the weak defenses Hawaii faced they were sacked 38 times, the 5th most in NCAA football this season. They scored 13ppg against defenses in the upper half of the NCAA. I look for Notre Dame to win this game by a good margin, and will back them in this one.
