Kentucky -14?

[jblonghorn]

I have a local old fart that knows his college football wagering as well as anyone, and I saw him this morning at the coffee shop. He said he likes Kentucky this weekend more than any game he's seen in 4 seasons. Anyone else have thoughts on this game vs Louisville?

This old guy is spot on with his thoughts and picks, he just doesn't usually divulge a lot, but I started talking golf with him so he eased up today.

 

[bellyputter]

If he is laying -14, he isn't very sharp.

 

[jbragg10]

read my post on the game in my thread to see how I feel about it

 

[nd2000]

Kentucky is nothing more than an SEC bottom feeder. Asking a team like this to cover two touchdowns against an improved Louisville squad is just asking for trouble.

 

[jblonghorn]

read my post on the game in my thread to see how I feel about it

Sweet. Thanks JBragg.

 

[scottw]

I live in Louisville and was waiting for this line to come out Sunday night. I grabbed KY -10. Wish I had bet more.

I don't think anyone realizes just how bad Louisville could be this year. Just look at their first game. They hosted Indiana State. They won the game 30-10.

Why is that important? Consider Indiana State. ISU came in here that night having lost 51 OF THEIR PREVIOUS 52 GAMES. They had opened the week before against Quincy (I assume not just one guy named Quincy) and LOST. Quincy is an NAIA school who lost the following week to SE Missouri 72-3.

Last year Indiana State went 0-12 and the average score of their games was 44-8 against.

UL has a coach under fire and a team that the community is down on. They had no reason not to want to go out and whack someone.

And the best they could do was 30-10. Against maybe the worst football team on the planet.

I don't think they were hiding anything or going all vanilla with UK on deck. And even if they were, if NAIA teams are beating Indiana State, how can a BCS conference team only beat them 30-10?

The only way I see UL covering is a back door job against a UK team that starts looking ahead to Florida coming to Lexington the following week.

 

[coitus_maximus]

Agreed here. Louisville is pretty bad. Leaning on Ky myself

 

[jbragg10]

Kentucky is nothing more than an SEC bottom feeder. Asking a team like this to cover two touchdowns against an improved Louisville squad is just asking for trouble.

lol ... where have you been? Improved Louisville team? lol You must not watch much Louisville football. Even the die hard Louisville fans in Louisville (where I live) are saying this is the worst team they have had in 10-15 years.

If you haven't noticed, UK has won 3 bowl games in a row (against Florida St., Clemson & ECU last year)

UK is at the bottom of the SEC b/c the SEC is extremely loaded. UK embarrassed Louisville last year and this years Louisville team is worse and the UK team this year is better with a more experienced Hartline and some better receivers. UK's defense is very good, led by 2 All-American candidates in Lindley and Micah Johnson.

Louisville straight sucks this year. Kragthorpe will be fired after this year. Inexperienced players in all positions. The only player they have is Victor Anderson (RB) and he will have a hard time running up the middle against 2 tough DT's for UK.

The only argument that I can see in this game is that it is a rivalry game and it might be hard to cover 2 TD's in a rivalry, but you can't argue that Louisville is improved from last year and UK is a bottom feeder. UK has improved a lot under Brooks. They came off probation (with scholarships taken away) and started winning some big games (all at a basketball school).

UK has had some big games over the last couple of years (better than previous years) and to say they don't compete against SEC is crazy. Put them in the Big East and they would be a top 3 team.

2008:
Lost by 3 to #2 Alabama
Lost by 7 to South Carolina
Beat Arkansas
Lost by 4 to #14 Georgia
Beat ECU

2007:
Beat Arkansas
Beat #9 Louisville
Beat #1 LSU
Lost by 8 to #12 Florida
Lost by 2 to Tennessee
Beat Florida St

 

[jbragg10]

I live in Louisville and was waiting for this line to come out Sunday night. I grabbed KY -10. Wish I had bet more.

I don't think anyone realizes just how bad Louisville could be this year. Just look at their first game. They hosted Indiana State. They won the game 30-10.

Why is that important? Consider Indiana State. ISU came in here that night having lost 51 OF THEIR PREVIOUS 52 GAMES. They had opened the week before against Quincy (I assume not just one guy named Quincy) and LOST. Quincy is an NAIA school who lost the following week to SE Missouri 72-3.

Last year Indiana State went 0-12 and the average score of their games was 44-8 against.

UL has a coach under fire and a team that the community is down on. They had no reason not to want to go out and whack someone.

And the best they could do was 30-10. Against maybe the worst football team on the planet.

I don't think they were hiding anything or going all vanilla with UK on deck. And even if they were, if NAIA teams are beating Indiana State, how can a BCS conference team only beat them 30-10?

The only way I see UL covering is a back door job against a UK team that starts looking ahead to Florida coming to Lexington the following week.

exactly. Louisville was losing early on to a horrible Indiana St team. They are very bad this year. The only reason for backing Louisville is because it's a rivalry game, but UK is better at every position on offense and defense.

 

[GoForIt]

I live in Louisville and was waiting for this line to come out Sunday night. I grabbed KY -10. Wish I had bet more.

I don't think anyone realizes just how bad Louisville could be this year. Just look at their first game. They hosted Indiana State. They won the game 30-10.

Why is that important? Consider Indiana State. ISU came in here that night having lost 51 OF THEIR PREVIOUS 52 GAMES. They had opened the week before against Quincy (I assume not just one guy named Quincy) and LOST. Quincy is an NAIA school who lost the following week to SE Missouri 72-3.

Last year Indiana State went 0-12 and the average score of their games was 44-8 against.

UL has a coach under fire and a team that the community is down on. They had no reason not to want to go out and whack someone.

And the best they could do was 30-10. Against maybe the worst football team on the planet.

I don't think they were hiding anything or going all vanilla with UK on deck. And even if they were, if NAIA teams are beating Indiana State, how can a BCS conference team only beat them 30-10?

The only way I see UL covering is a back door job against a UK team that starts looking ahead to Florida coming to Lexington the following week.

Quincy? Isn't that a steakhouse off the Interstates?

 

[jblonghorn]

Good points JBragg. I took Kentucky straight at -14, and also did a teaser (which I rarely do) with Texas -4, Kentucky -1, Miami +8.5 and Va Tech +8. I love those bets. We shall see though. I hate to say it, but TX, Kent and Va Tech seems safe. It's just Miami that worries me, but w/ 2 weeks to prepare for the option, I'll take my chances. BOL all and thanks for your insight.

 

[nd2000]

2008:
Lost by 3 to #2 Alabama
Lost by 7 to South Carolina
Beat Arkansas
Lost by 4 to #14 Georgia
Beat ECU

Oh come on man. This is blatant bias, not handicapping. How about a 63-5 loss in the swamp? How about beating shitty Middle Tennessee state by only 6 at home? How about getting destroyed by a poor Tennessee team? How about losing at home to Vanderbilt?? You conveniently left all that good stuff out of your analysis in an attempt to prove that UK is not an SEC bottom feeder, which they clearly are.

As for the game at UL last year, you act like UK just had worlds more talent than UL and that a blowout was to be expected. The final score of 27-2 was very deceptive. UK put up a paltry 210 yards of offense in that game to UL's 205. UK averaged 1.9 yards/rush as compared to UL averaging 1.8 yards/rush. UK averaged 4.7 yards/pass to UL averaging 3.5 yards/pass. That is hardly a dominant performance in my book. If UK really was a ton better than UL, they would have outgained them severely and averaged much, much higher yards/play. The difference in the game was mostly the turnover margin of 5-1 in favor of UK, including two fumble returns for TDs.

Is UK better than Louisville. Probably so. Are they easily 14 points better? I highly doubt it.

 

[nd2000]

I live in Louisville and was waiting for this line to come out Sunday night. I grabbed KY -10. Wish I had bet more.

I don't think anyone realizes just how bad Louisville could be this year. Just look at their first game. They hosted Indiana State. They won the game 30-10.

This is a very narrow minded take on the situation and a sure way to lose money in the sportsbook. UL held a 419-101 yardage edge in the game. They rushed for 5.9 yards/run and held Indiana State to 0.6 yards/rush. They passed for 6.9 yards/pass and held ISU to 3.9 yards/rush. Louisville was much more dominant in this game than the final score suggests.

 

[STACKSONDECK]

This is a very narrow minded take on the situation and a sure way to lose money in the sportsbook. UL held a 419-101 yardage edge in the game. They rushed for 5.9 yards/run and held Indiana State to 0.6 yards/rush. They passed for 6.9 yards/pass and held ISU to 3.9 yards/rush. Louisville was much more dominant in this game than the final score suggests.

whats a better play kentucky -1 or louie +27?

 

[jbragg10]

Oh come on man. This is blatant bias, not handicapping. How about a 63-5 loss in the swamp? How about beating shitty Middle Tennessee state by only 6 at home? How about getting destroyed by a poor Tennessee team? How about losing at home to Vanderbilt?? You conveniently left all that good stuff out of your analysis in an attempt to prove that UK is not an SEC bottom feeder, which they clearly are.

As for the game at UL last year, you act like UK just had worlds more talent than UL and that a blowout was to be expected. The final score of 27-2 was very deceptive. UK put up a paltry 210 yards of offense in that game to UL's 205. UK averaged 1.9 yards/rush as compared to UL averaging 1.8 yards/rush. UK averaged 4.7 yards/pass to UL averaging 3.5 yards/pass. That is hardly a dominant performance in my book. If UK really was a ton better than UL, they would have outgained them severely and averaged much, much higher yards/play. The difference in the game was mostly the turnover margin of 5-1 in favor of UK, including two fumble returns for TDs.

Is UK better than Louisville. Probably so. Are they easily 14 points better? I highly doubt it.

not bias at all. I usually bet against UK and I have around a 65% margin when betting for/against UK. All I am saying is that UK has played some very good games. Have they had some poor games ... well of course, who hasn't. Still, they play in a tough conference and yes they would be a top 3 team in the big east. ... and talking about last year's game, turnovers are part of the game my friend. That's like saying, if Louisville would have completed all their passes, they would have won. They turn the ball over. The game is at UK this year as well

 

[nd2000]

whats a better play kentucky -1 or louie +27?

ul +27

 

[jbragg10]

This is a very narrow minded take on the situation and a sure way to lose money in the sportsbook. UL held a 419-101 yardage edge in the game. They rushed for 5.9 yards/run and held Indiana State to 0.6 yards/rush. They passed for 6.9 yards/pass and held ISU to 3.9 yards/rush. Louisville was much more dominant in this game than the final score suggests.

you are saying that Louisville dominated Indiana St. lol ... wow .... I would hope so. Stats are worth nothing ... if you don't capitalize. I watched the game and no Louisville was not impressive at all. You can throw every stat out there, but unless you actually watched it, there is nothing to talk about

 

[nd2000]

and talking about last year's game, turnovers are part of the game my friend. That's like saying, if Louisville would have completed all their passes, they would have won. They turn the ball over. The game is at UK this year as well

Obviously turnovers are a part of the game, but you cannot count on them and accurately handicap them. Anyone is going to look like a world beater when they get two gift fumble returns for a touchdown.

 

[jbragg10]

ul +27

agree on this one. 27 points is way too much to be giving in a rivalry game.

 

[nd2000]

you are saying that Louisville dominated Indiana St. lol ... wow .... I would hope so. Stats are worth nothing ... if you don't capitalize. I watched the game and no Louisville was not impressive at all. You can throw every stat out there, but unless you actually watched it, there is nothing to talk about

Stats are worth a lot. There are tons of misleading scores from week to week. The stats tell the true story. If you hold a team to 0.6 yards/rush you have dominated the line of scrimmage w/out question.