Sharps, Traditionalists Bemoaming A Chalk-heavy College Weekend

[ACE-ACE]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]GOOD READ FROM NICK:toast:[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]DIRECT FROM NEVADA
WITH NICK BOGDANOVICH[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]SHARPS, TRADITIONALISTS BEMOAMING A CHALK-HEAVY COLLEGE WEEKEND[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Most sharps weren't very happy with the results this weekend in college football.[/FONT]

• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Sharps love betting on underdogs, but it was very much a favorite weekend from start to finish.[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Many of the most popular underdog plays didn't get there. A few did, like Utah over Michigan, and Alabama over Clemson. Many of the "ugly favorites" that sharps like to bet against won by bigger margins than expected. [/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Many took positions on Unders across the board after rules changes that could have decreased the number of plays per game. Scoring didn't change dramatically because good offenses still piled up the points, and many games with lesser offenses saw cheap points from turnovers or special teams. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It was far from a disaster for sharps. It was clearly a disappointment though. I heard a lot of guys talking very confidently about their plays Wednesday and Thursday. I heard a lot of muttering during the day and early evening Saturday. By late in the card, nobody was around to mutter any more. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Sharps always have ways to lessen the blow when things aren't going well. The fact that they bet at early lines helps them win some games that stragglers lose. They also make good use of first half and second half options once the games are under way. If you can see in the first half that you're team is outmatched, you can bet the other team in the second half and make back some of your loss. This happened a few times Saturday night. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I watched games from morning to midnight. Here's what I took from the season openers.[/FONT]

• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The rules changes aren't going to slow down productive offenses. Maybe later in the season, opponents who can play ball control will keep those offenses off the field. Right now, many of the best offenses aren't facing opponents who can do that. So, you're still going to see big numbers from elite offenses until the schedules toughen up. This favors favorites with great offenses obviously. I think a few too many sharps bet against great offenses figuring they wouldn't be up to speed yet. They were. [/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Having experience at quarterback may not mean much if the quarterback isn't very good. I heard a lot of guys taking shots on underdogs because they returned their starting quarterback. It makes sense in principal. But, once the games were being played, those guys were still stinking up the joint. The "added" card in particular saw "experienced" quarterbacks getting routed for Louisiana Monroe, Louisiana Lafayette, Florida Atlantic, and North Texas. Idaho returned its starting quarterback and lost 70-0 to Arizona. I think some bettors placed too much weight on experience and not enough on quality. [/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Having a new quarterback isn't the end of the world as long as a decent system is in place. I can understand the logic of taking points against inexperienced quarterbacks. Some guys did that with Washington against Oregon, and lost 44-10. Some did it with Kent State and lost 21-0. I don't know too many guys who loaded up on UAB. But, that was a similar situation. With a new quarterback, Tulsa put up 601 yards in a cover as a road favorite. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Another thing I should mention here is that many sharps bet less aggressively in the first week than they will later in the season. I think that's a smart approach when you're dealing with "unknown's" at key positions. At the end of August, you're "thinking" that teams may have trouble with a new QB. By October, you know who is or isn't having trouble and you can get more aggressively.[/FONT]

• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The public, and probably sharps too, overrate the impact of making a coaching change. You see somebody like Bo Pellini at Nebraska inspire a huge first game, and you think that's the norm. It's actually closer to the exception. Michigan didn't play well under its new coach (but almost stole a win anyway). Texas A&M lost outright as a big favorite. Arkansas almost did the same thing and they weren't even playing a board game. You watched SMU get routed Friday Night by Rice. [/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The mindset in Las Vegas and Reno that oddsmakers are "battling the sharps" rather than trying to split action has probably lowered the lines too much in season openers. The sportsbooks know that the sharps want to take underdogs. Lines aren't as high as they used to be in the openers. But, teams who know what they're doing can still name the score against teams who don't. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I don't expect this to be a "year of the favorite," or anything like that. Competitive balance is alive and well in college football. It's just less alive in the first week when there are so many mismatches. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I think dogs will make money this year:[/FONT]

• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In conference games, because the differences from best to worst aren't as big as the public thinks in these games...and because high profile teams just can't get mentally sky high each and every week. There will be upsets. [/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In games matching ranked teams...because the public usually overrates the team with the better ranking. There's hardly any difference these days between #10 and #25. The public thinks there is. [/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In games featuring top ten teams once we're a month into the season. These past few years, we've seen a lot of teams lose their focus as soon as they've climbed their way to an impressive place in the rankings. They get arrogant. Opponents get motivated to play them, and underdogs either pull off upsets or cash their tickets in a close loss. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]You'll note most of those don't describe early season football. There are some conference games now...but we're a few weeks away from virtually ALL games being conference games. The ranked teams haven't had a chance to get arrogant yet. The public hasn't has a chance to fall in love with any pretenders yet either. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I wouldn't be surprised if this next week also skews toward favorites. Be careful trying to jam any dogs where they don't belong. If you're going to pick dogs this weekend:[/FONT]

• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Make sure you have a good quarterback, not just an experienced quarterback. [/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Make sure you have a decent defense, preferably top 25 and no worse than top 50.[/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Make sure you're not going against an offense that has the tools to hit on all cylinders. It's really silly to cross your fingers and hope a great offense stubs its toe. Try to go against struggling offenses who are still figuring out how to tie their shoes. [/FONT]
• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]See if you can find motivational kickers like revenge or look ahead spots. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]If you lost with dogs this past weekend, I think you'll find that many of your choices would have flunked one of those litmus tests. Did you have a bad quarterback? Were you hoping a lousy defense would rise to the occasion for you? Were you going against somebody like Oregon or Missouri that has a dangerous offensive schematic? [/FONT]

 

[w8lifterguy]

Thanks ACE, love to read Nick's write-ups.
Keep posting them

 

[GoSooners]

Ace-Ace....I pretty much agree with everything in the article. But if you do a running count on the amount of favorites who won this year, I'm betting it won't be that much different than other years...The favorites were 35-13 ATS last season on opening day. This is why it's a good idea to really study and cherrypick your dogs in the first weekend.

 

[MajorGCG]

I havent been around as long as some, but as I recall favs always dominate opening weekend and dogs come around later in the year.

 

[vijaysinger]

I wonder if its because a lot of inter conference games where theres a big gap in the talent levels like MAC vs Big East or WAC vs SEC?

 

[Jetplane]

Tell nick to send me some Bonus Plays or not to keep sending me ads > His record holding true?

 

[sdf]

wouldnt the books like it when the sharps lose?

sharps bet more than public?

 

[Conan]

They'd be sharper if they had read the picks our "sharps" posted.

 

[FairWarning]

Week one was no different then any other year. Teams are outmatched, and playing smaller conference teams hoping to cover with no chance of winning is not very smart.