Random Trends

[GoSooners]

Here a few general trends that I have in the data bank. Some I haven't updated this year, but should still be in the ballpark. I will be adding more as they come in. Feel free to add some of your own. Hopefully we can keep this going as a running thread leading up to the season openers.




When playing their season opener on the road as a favorite, Power 5 conference teams have delivered a 57.6% winning percentage. This is based on 200 games in the stockpile.

This is a pretty good one: September conference road dogs with a game total of less than 49 cover the spread 70% of the time. That's based on a 6 year 88 game sample. I'm not sure how they performed last year. Remember this is only for September, and it's only for conference games. By the way, the ATS numbers are even better for non Power 5 conferences.

The 20/20 trend: If a team loses by 20+ points the week before and are home favorites by -20 or more the next week they cover the spread 61.6% of the time since 1980.

We're getting into Marc Lawrence territory here, but still a trend worth mentioning if you keep up with all the numbers. Play against any college football road team that has won at least 3 games in a row, against a home team that has lost 3 games in a row, if the team that has won 3 straight is no more than a -7.5 point favorite, pickem or underdog. Basically, you only stay away from betting against them if the line is -8 or higher. Since 1980 these teams that tempt Joe Gambler are just 29-50-2 ATS. Playing against them has a win rate of over 63%. Something we might be able to use by medseason or so. This dates back to 1980. But I've heard that since 2005 this trend is even stronger against these favorites.

The best conference ATS in non-conference games last year was the CUSA 35-22. The worst was the AAC at 19-29 ATS.

In conference games over the last 10 seasons, UNLV is 14.68 points better when playing at home.

Over the past 10 CFB seasons, blindly betting Overs on spreads of 30 or higher has hit 55.38% (282-232) when totals were posted in those games.

Going back to 2005 in my spread data, only one team has won double digit games ATS in back to back seasons: Ohio State in 2009-10.

Savannah State's track record against FBS opponents the last 7 games they have been outscored 490-26


That's it for now...

 

[cloverleaf]

What's the old saying? "The trend is not always your friend."

There's one site who offers plays where they 'go against' the trends in certain games. Last season they went
27-19 (58.6%) ATS in college football. Trends are a tool but should not be used exclusively for making picks.
A player will usually get burned playing that approach.

Once I've settled on a play, I like to try and reinforce my pick with positive trends. Other than that...don't use
them much choosing plays.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Some Alabama ATS situations after losing, then playing the next game in Bryant-Denny:

Off Loss: 8-16
Off BB Loses: 2-7
Off DD Loss: 3-10
Off Fav Loss: 3-6
Off SUATS Loss: 5-12
Off BB SUATS Loss: 2-3

 

[GoSooners]

That's true Clover, but there are some trends that are "common sense" trends that sometimes the public doesn't see. Like the September conference road dog with a total under 49. No matter what the public thinks of the spread, when Vegas sets a low total like that between two conference teams fighting it out for early conference dominance in September, the chances of it being a close game are much greater. And of course the bigger the spread the better. Most of the trends that I post, like anything else, you don't want to bet them blindly. But you sure as hell better consider them in your handicapping! Especially if it's a 70% trend.

 

[sendacash]

I like to occasionally use that 20/20 system in weeks 2 & 3 for some random FBS on FCS violence.

 

[cloverleaf]

That's true Clover, but there are some trends that are "common sense" trends that sometimes the public doesn't see.

Here's a trend GS that makes your point about "common sense" use.

**Air Force is 1-9 ATS in games after facing Navy and Army since 2010.
Common sense tell one there's a let down after two of the most important
games on the Falcons schedule. That's the type reinforcement I look for.

 

[GoSooners]

I like to occasionally use that 20/20 system in weeks 2 & 3 for some random FBS on FCS violence.

I wish it came up more often. We only see this trend happen about 5 times per year on average for FBS teams..

 

[GoSooners]

Here's a trend GS that makes your point about "common sense" use.

**Air Force is 1-9 ATS in games after facing Navy and Army since 2010.
Common sense tell one there's a let down after two of the most important
games on the Falcons schedule. That's the type reinforcement I look for.

Exactly

 

[BigdaddyQH]

Good article Go. I have known Mark Lawrence for many years now. The major problem with his system, and all technical systems for that matter, is knowing what to weed out and what to use. There are literally thousands of angle and trends that one can find in a season. A couple of things to remember. "On the road" means just that. In Lawrence's numbers, that does NOT include "Neutral" site games. Thus, Alabama-Wisconsin and Auburn Louisville would not qualify for a Power 5 away favorite in week 1. Right now, I see Baylor (at SMU), Colorado possibly (at Hawaii), Duke (at Tulane), Michigan State (at Western Michigan), Miss. State (at Southern Miss), Ohio State (at Va. Tech), Oklahoma State (at Central Michigan), Penn State (at Temple), Stanford (at Northwestern), and TCU (at Minnesota), all qualify. There may be an addition or deletion depending on how the odds end up, but these 10 games look to be the games that cover the qualifications. That means that 5 games should cover, 4 games should lose, and there should be one tie. (All ATS).

As far as the 20/20 trend goes, it is very difficult to find games that qualify. You said that this trend dates back to 1980. I would like to know how many games are actually involved. Last season Clemson lost to GA. Tech 28-6 (22 points) and were a 40 point favorite against Georgia State the following week. They did not cover. NIU was crushed by Arkansas 52-14. The next week they failed to cover a 25 point chalk line getting past Kent State 17-14. So 0-2 for last season as far as I can tell. Michigan State came close, but only lost to Oregon by 19.

 

[GoSooners]

Good article Go. I have known Mark Lawrence for many years now. The major problem with his system, and all technical systems for that matter, is knowing what to weed out and what to use. There are literally thousands of angle and trends that one can find in a season. A couple of things to remember. "On the road" means just that. In Lawrence's numbers, that does NOT include "Neutral" site games. Thus, Alabama-Wisconsin and Auburn Louisville would not qualify for a Power 5 away favorite in week 1. Right now, I see Baylor (at SMU), Colorado possibly (at Hawaii), Duke (at Tulane), Michigan State (at Western Michigan), Miss. State (at Southern Miss), Ohio State (at Va. Tech), Oklahoma State (at Central Michigan), Penn State (at Temple), Stanford (at Northwestern), and TCU (at Minnesota), all qualify. There may be an addition or deletion depending on how the odds end up, but these 10 games look to be the games that cover the qualifications. That means that 5 games should cover, 4 games should lose, and there should be one tie. (All ATS).

As far as the 20/20 trend goes, it is very difficult to find games that qualify. You said that this trend dates back to 1980. I would like to know how many games are actually involved. Last season Clemson lost to GA. Tech 28-6 (22 points) and were a 40 point favorite against Georgia State the following week. They did not cover. NIU was crushed by Arkansas 52-14. The next week they failed to cover a 25 point chalk line getting past Kent State 17-14. So 0-2 for last season as far as I can tell. Michigan State came close, but only lost to Oregon by 19.

The last i chacked this 20/20 trend was 2 years ago and it's overall record was 114-71-3. Which kind of surprised me because I looked for these games last year and don't recall finding any that fell under that trend.

 

[BigdaddyQH]

I only found those two. If the record of 114-73-3 (as of last year) is true, we are looking at about 5 1/2 games a year. That means a possible 3-2 record. People do not have the patience for that, even though any system that hits around 60% is a success. One of the biggest killers of Joe Pub and his buddies is the lack of patience that they display. Thjey have to win now, and since they are so limited in the amount of money they can wager, they have to play a ton of games to get where they want to be. To me it is a no brainer. Which is easier. Playing 500 a game and going 6-4 for a net profit of 800 or going 60-40 at 50 a game for a net profit of 800? The more games you wager on, the better your chances of hitting 50%, and that, as we all know, is a loser.

 

[GoSooners]

I'm much more careful with some of these trends than I used to be. For instance the road dog in Sept. with a total under 49. I kept pretty close track of this last year. But the problem is the sharps or public or both have somewhat caught on to it, and I found it hard to get a line to move in my favor with these games. Plus Vegas seems to set tighter than expected lines for these games, although I still get some value with it occasionally, and have won with it several times over the years...I tend to play the non-power 5 conferences with this trend more than any since there is less money bet on these games and sometimes better line value.

 

[jblonghorn]

I still love the look ahead angle in college football. These college kids just can't help but looking ahead to the big game the following week. This obviously doesn't count in week 1/2. Well, except for maybe OU this year, but teams are so ready to play they usually don't overlook game 1. Damn I'm excited boys!!!

 

[rolltide]

This is a pretty good one: September conference road dogs with a game total of less than 49 cover the spread 70% of the time. That's based on a 6 year 88 game sample. I'm not sure how they performed last year. Remember this is only for September, and it's only for conference games. By the way, the ATS numbers are even better for non Power 5 conferences.

month = 9 and ACD and total < 48.5
SU: 42-64-0 (-2.92, 39.6%) Teaser Records ATS: 74-28-4 (6.89, 72.5%) avg line: 9.8 +6: 89-17-0 (84.0%) -6: 48-56-2 (46.2%) +10: 94-9-3 (91.3%) -10: 41-63-2 (39.4%) O/U: 41-63-2 (-1.07, 39.4%) avg total: 44.1 +6: 27-78-1 (25.7%) -6: 59-47-0 (55.7%) +10: 23-82-1 (21.9%) -10: 74-30-2 (71.2%)

by season:

month = 9 and ACD and total < 48.5 and ...

games	ATS W - L- P (marg, %win)	Avg Line	OU W - L- P (marg, %over)	Avg Total	SU W - L- P (marg, %win)	SDQL
6	5-1-0 (16.83, 83.3%)	10.7	2-4-0 (-7.42, 33.3%)	45.2	3-3-0 (6.17, 50.0%)	season = 2014
2	2-0-0 (7.75, 100.0%)	11.2	1-1-0 (-7.75, 50.0%)	45.2	1-1-0 (-3.50, 50.0%)	season = 2013
8	5-3-0 (5.88, 62.5%)	5.9	2-5-1 (-3.25, 28.6%)	45.5	4-4-0 (0.00, 50.0%)	season = 2012
3	1-2-0 (-1.33, 33.3%)	8.3	2-1-0 (6.33, 66.7%)	46.7	0-3-0 (-9.67, 0.0%)	season = 2011
5	2-3-0 (-0.30, 40.0%)	6.5	0-5-0 (-13.70, 0.0%)	45.7	1-4-0 (-6.80, 20.0%)	season = 2010
12	7-5-0 (0.17, 58.3%)	8.9	6-6-0 (3.71, 50.0%)	44.7	3-9-0 (-8.75, 25.0%)	season = 2009
16	14-2-0 (5.19, 87.5%)	8.6	6-10-0 (-2.03, 37.5%)	43.2	7-9-0 (-3.44, 43.8%)	season = 2008
26	18-8-0 (6.21, 69.2%)	8.6	12-13-1 (1.88, 48.0%)	44.8	11-15-0 (-2.42, 42.3%)	season = 2007
28	20-4-4 (11.64, 83.3%)	13.6	10-18-0 (-1.39, 35.7%)	42.5	12-16-0 (-1.93, 42.9%)	season = 2006

by conference:

games	ATS W - L- P (marg, %win)	Avg Line	OU W - L- P (marg, %over)	Avg Total	SU W - L- P (marg, %win)	SDQL
1	0-1-0 (-1.00, 0.0%)	2.0	0-1-0 (-12.50, 0.0%)	43.5	0-1-0 (-3.00, 0.0%)	conference = AAC
29	20-8-1 (4.97, 71.4%)	10.2	8-20-1 (-3.47, 28.6%)	43.5	11-18-0 (-5.21, 37.9%)	conference = ACC
13	9-3-1 (10.62, 75.0%)	9.5	4-9-0 (-1.73, 30.8%)	43.3	7-6-0 (1.15, 53.8%)	conference = B10
2	1-0-1 (7.75, 100.0%)	18.8	2-0-0 (14.25, 100.0%)	41.8	0-2-0 (-11.00, 0.0%)	conference = B12
2	2-0-0 (22.75, 100.0%)	7.8	1-1-0 (-2.25, 50.0%)	44.2	2-0-0 (15.00, 100.0%)	conference = BE
12	10-2-0 (13.58, 83.3%)	11.8	6-6-0 (3.25, 50.0%)	45.5	6-6-0 (1.75, 50.0%)	conference = MAC
5	4-1-0 (11.30, 80.0%)	9.5	2-3-0 (-4.20, 40.0%)	45.2	3-2-0 (1.80, 60.0%)	conference = MWC
2	1-1-0 (3.75, 50.0%)	4.8	1-1-0 (8.75, 50.0%)	44.2	1-1-0 (-1.00, 50.0%)	conference = P10
7	4-3-0 (5.57, 57.1%)	6.6	1-5-1 (-5.00, 16.7%)	45.1	3-4-0 (-1.00, 42.9%)	conference = SBC
27	18-8-1 (3.87, 69.2%)	10.5	13-14-0 (-0.06, 48.1%)	44.1	7-20-0 (-6.63, 25.9%)	conference = SEC
3	3-0-0 (10.33, 100.0%)	6.7	1-2-0 (-4.67, 33.3%)	46.3	1-2-0 (3.67, 33.3%)	conference = USA
3	2-1-0 (-4.33, 66.7%)	6.3	2-1-0 (4.33, 66.7%)	44.3	1-2-0 (-10.67, 33.3%)	conference = WAC

Showing 1 to 12 of 12 entries

 

[rolltide]

Play against any college football road team that has won at least 3 games in a row, against a home team that has lost 3 games in a row, if the team that has won 3 straight is no more than a -7.5 point favorite, pickem or underdog. Basically, you only stay away from betting against them if the line is -8 or higher. Since 1980 these teams that tempt Joe Gambler are just 29-50-2 ATS. Playing against them has a win rate of over 63%. Something we might be able to use by medseason or so. This dates back to 1980. But I've heard that since 2005 this trend is even stronger against these favorites.

A and streak >= 3 and o:streak <= -3 and line > -8 and ...

games	ATS W - L- P (marg, %win)	Avg Line	OU W - L- P (marg, %over)	Avg Total	SU W - L- P (marg, %win)	SDQL
2	1-1-0 (-3.75, 50.0%)	-5.2	1-1-0 (3.25, 50.0%)	53.2	1-1-0 (1.50, 50.0%)	season = 2014
6	6-0-0 (20.92, 100.0%)	-5.2	3-3-0 (2.08, 50.0%)	50.4	6-0-0 (26.17, 100.0%)	season = 2013
6	1-5-0 (-5.50, 16.7%)	-3.8	1-5-0 (-7.67, 16.7%)	57.0	3-3-0 (-1.67, 50.0%)	season = 2012
3	2-1-0 (7.33, 66.7%)	-2.0	1-2-0 (-5.83, 33.3%)	46.5	2-1-0 (9.33, 66.7%)	season = 2011
3	0-3-0 (-13.67, 0.0%)	4.7	2-1-0 (4.83, 66.7%)	48.2	1-2-0 (-18.33, 33.3%)	season = 2010
4	0-3-1 (-8.62, 0.0%)	-1.1	3-1-0 (6.62, 75.0%)	52.4	1-3-0 (-7.50, 25.0%)	season = 2009
6	0-5-1 (-7.83, 0.0%)	-1.7	2-4-0 (-4.75, 33.3%)	51.2	2-4-0 (-6.17, 33.3%)	season = 2008
3	0-3-0 (-11.33, 0.0%)	-5.3	2-1-0 (-1.67, 66.7%)	49.7	0-3-0 (-6.00, 0.0%)	season = 2007
5	0-5-0 (-17.60, 0.0%)	4.8	3-2-0 (0.20, 60.0%)	49.4	0-5-0 (-22.40, 0.0%)	season = 2006
4	1-3-0 (0.50, 25.0%)	-4.5	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	2-2-0 (5.00, 50.0%)	season = 2005
2	0-2-0 (-7.75, 0.0%)	0.2	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	0-2-0 (-8.00, 0.0%)	season = 2004
6	2-4-0 (-10.50, 33.3%)	1.8	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	1-5-0 (-12.33, 16.7%)	season = 2003
2	0-2-0 (-19.25, 0.0%)	-2.2	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	0-2-0 (-17.00, 0.0%)	season = 2002
3	1-2-0 (4.00, 33.3%)	-5.3	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	2-1-0 (9.33, 66.7%)	season = 2001
4	3-1-0 (12.12, 75.0%)	-2.9	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	4-0-0 (15.00, 100.0%)	season = 2000
2	1-1-0 (-15.75, 50.0%)	0.2	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	0-2-0 (-16.00, 0.0%)	season = 1999
4	1-3-0 (-9.75, 25.0%)	1.2	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	1-3-0 (-11.00, 25.0%)	season = 1998
2	1-1-0 (1.75, 50.0%)	-0.8	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	1-1-0 (2.50, 50.0%)	season = 1997
2	1-1-0 (-13.25, 50.0%)	-3.2	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	1-1-0 (-10.00, 50.0%)	season = 1996
3	2-1-0 (0.33, 66.7%)	-4.0	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	2-1-0 (4.33, 66.7%)	season = 1995
3	3-0-0 (7.00, 100.0%)	-6.3	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	3-0-0 (13.33, 100.0%)	season = 1994
2	1-1-0 (3.00, 50.0%)	2.0	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	1-1-0 (1.00, 50.0%)	season = 1993
3	1-2-0 (-12.33, 33.3%)	1.0	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	1-2-0 (-13.33, 33.3%)	season = 1992
2	1-1-0 (10.25, 50.0%)	1.8	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	1-1-0 (8.50, 50.0%)	season = 1991
1	0-1-0 (-2.50, 0.0%)	-5.5	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	1-0-0 (3.00, 100.0%)	season = 1990
2	2-0-0 (10.75, 100.0%)	-5.2	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	2-0-0 (16.00, 100.0%)	season = 1988
1	0-1-0 (-9.50, 0.0%)	-5.5	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	0-1-0 (-4.00, 0.0%)	season = 1986
1	0-1-0 (-2.00, 0.0%)	-3.0	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	1-0-0 (1.00, 100.0%)	season = 1985
2	2-0-0 (21.75, 100.0%)	-3.2	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	2-0-0 (25.00, 100.0%)	season = 1984
3	2-1-0 (3.17, 66.7%)	2.2	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	1-2-0 (1.00, 33.3%)	season = 1983
1	0-1-0 (-10.50, 0.0%)	-7.5	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	0-1-0 (-3.00, 0.0%)	season = 1982
2	2-0-0 (7.50, 100.0%)	-2.0	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	2-0-0 (9.50, 100.0%)	season = 1981

Showing 1 to 32 of 32 entries

btw, dogs or favs no more than -5.5 are much better than the -8 you quoted...

A and streak >= 3 and o:streak <= -3 and line > -6
SU: 27-43-0 (-4.01, 38.6%) Teaser Records ATS: 23-45-2 (-3.86, 33.8%) avg line: 0.1 +6: 36-34-0 (51.4%) -6: 17-52-1 (24.6%) +10: 44-25-1 (63.8%) -10: 15-55-0 (21.4%)

solid since 2001:

A and streak >= 3 and o:streak <= -3 and line > -6 and season > 2001
SU: 11-27-0 (-6.21, 28.9%) Teaser Records ATS: 8-28-2 (-5.74, 22.2%) avg line: 0.5 +6: 16-22-0 (42.1%) -6: 6-31-1 (16.2%) +10: 20-17-1 (54.1%) -10: 6-32-0 (15.8%)

(btw i will steal these for my weekly systems thread and post in there so don't have to keep track)

 

[rolltide]

The 20/20 trend: If a team loses by 20+ points the week before and are home favorites by -20 or more the next week they cover the spread 61.6% of the time since 1980.

i have something similar to this one packed away. will post them next week .... here is your 20/20 with normal rest

nice SU #....

p:margin <= -20 and F and line <= -20 and 12 > rest > 5 and site = home
SU: 213-4-1 (31.53, 98.2%) Teaser Records ATS: 133-81-4 (4.15, 62.1%) avg line: -27.4 +6: 158-56-4 (73.8%) -6: 93-123-2 (43.1%) +10: 179-39-0 (82.1%) -10: 72-143-3 (33.5%)

and by conference ats winning %:

games	ATS W - L- P (marg, %win)	Avg Line	OU W - L- P (marg, %over)	Avg Total	SU W - L- P (marg, %win)	SDQL
1	0-1-0 (-23.00, 0.0%)	-23.0	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	0-0-1 (0.00, 0.0%)	conference = BW
25	12-12-1 (0.44, 50.0%)	-29.8	2-6-0 (-8.06, 25.0%)	55.6	23-2-0 (30.28, 92.0%)	conference = SEC
8	4-4-0 (5.94, 50.0%)	-33.6	5-0-0 (9.70, 100.0%)	58.5	8-0-0 (39.50, 100.0%)	conference = SBC
6	3-3-0 (5.58, 50.0%)	-31.6	2-2-0 (3.50, 50.0%)	63.0	6-0-0 (37.17, 100.0%)	conference = P12
8	4-4-0 (-2.88, 50.0%)	-25.2	3-3-0 (-0.58, 50.0%)	54.6	8-0-0 (22.38, 100.0%)	conference = MWC
15	8-7-0 (4.67, 53.3%)	-26.9	3-4-0 (-1.86, 42.9%)	62.0	15-0-0 (31.60, 100.0%)	conference = USA
13	7-6-0 (5.19, 53.8%)	-24.5	1-2-0 (-7.67, 33.3%)	51.7	13-0-0 (29.69, 100.0%)	conference = WAC
16	9-7-0 (3.06, 56.2%)	-25.4	1-0-0 (3.00, 100.0%)	52.0	15-1-0 (28.44, 93.8%)	conference = IND
23	14-9-0 (1.96, 60.9%)	-26.4	4-6-0 (-0.35, 40.0%)	54.0	23-0-0 (28.39, 100.0%)	conference = B10
24	13-8-3 (1.17, 61.9%)	-29.3	5-7-0 (-2.96, 41.7%)	52.0	24-0-0 (30.50, 100.0%)	conference = ACC
3	2-1-0 (11.67, 66.7%)	-34.3	1-2-0 (-0.67, 33.3%)	57.3	3-0-0 (46.00, 100.0%)	conference = AAC
23	16-7-0 (2.93, 69.6%)	-26.3	2-5-0 (1.93, 28.6%)	56.1	22-1-0 (29.22, 95.7%)	conference = MAC
25	18-7-0 (8.38, 72.0%)	-23.5	3-3-0 (5.83, 50.0%)	61.0	25-0-0 (31.92, 100.0%)	conference = B12
8	6-2-0 (10.38, 75.0%)	-27.9	0-1-0 (-14.50, 0.0%)	56.5	8-0-0 (38.25, 100.0%)	conference = P10
15	12-3-0 (8.53, 80.0%)	-30.1	1-0-0 (16.50, 100.0%)	56.5	15-0-0 (38.67, 100.0%)	conference = BE
4	4-0-0 (17.62, 100.0%)	-26.6	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	4-0-0 (44.25, 100.0%)	conference = SWC
1	1-0-0 (5.50, 100.0%)	-22.5	0-0-0 (0.00, 0.0%)	-	1-0-0 (28.00, 100.0%)	conference = None

Showing 1 to 17 of 17 entries

 

[GoSooners]

Thanks for the trends update RT

 

[GoSooners]

Since returning to Kansas State for the 2009 season, coach Bill Snyder has gone 47-21 ATS on the second half line, by far the best in the NCAAF.

 

[russ1945]

Since returning to Kansas State for the 2009 season, coach Bill Snyder has gone 47-21 ATS on the second half line, by far the best in the NCAAF.

I bet a lot of second half lines. That is why I have multiple TV's and watch more than one game at a time. If you have some healthy trends and the game appears to be heading in that direction that could help immensely.

 

[GoSooners]

I bet a lot of second half lines. That is why I have multiple TV's and watch more than one game at a time. If you have some healthy trends and the game appears to be heading in that direction that could help immensely.

I've won a lot of 2nd half bets on Snyder. But I had no idea he had this good of an ATS record until I saw this trend. Pretty remarkable, and a testament of just how good of a coach he is.

 

[NoCoke]

Since returning to Kansas State for the 2009 season, coach Bill Snyder has gone 47-21 ATS on the second half line, by far the best in the NCAAF.

Also hasn't had a losing ATS season since returning to Kansas State.

Oh and he's 17-1 ATS against Kansas. And only 2 of those 17 have been covers with an ATS margin of less than 9. Can't see that changing much this year.