I know several of these teams don't have much to play for, but I'm asking you guys if you think they should be dogs anyway. I like the team with the points next to em.
CAR @ TB+3 who cares if TB doesn't have much to play for, CAR is DOO-DOO.
DAL +9 @ WAS Will the pokes (and jerry) REALLY let their #1 rival beat them by 10, even with starters on the bench?
JAX +6.5 @ HOU Jax would need to sit a LOT of their O line for this to be a houston win by 7.
SEA +1.5 @ ATL see carolina logic. atlants is worse. i think atlants is the worst team in the league.
i like these non playoff team matchups separately from the stars are sitting reasons:
CIN @ MIA +2.5 Cinci doesn't give a crap, Miami is playing hard to win a game, and Cin ain't really that tough.
NO -2 @ CHI Chi is starting Kyle. Orton. I just don't think they can score enough to keep up with NO unless I've missed a memo about the saints sitting everyone somewhere.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Friday, December 7, 2007
NFL Cash Trasher
Here's what I like. If history is any guide, I am about 50% right.
Miami @ Buffalo -7
San Diego pickem @ Tennessee
Tampa Bay -3 @ Houston
Minnesota -8.5 @ SF
Cleveland -3.5 @ NY Jets
Nawlins -4 @ Atlanta
NY Giants @ Philadelphia +3
I reery, reery, rike TB, Cle, and NO. A lot.
Miami @ Buffalo -7
San Diego pickem @ Tennessee
Tampa Bay -3 @ Houston
Minnesota -8.5 @ SF
Cleveland -3.5 @ NY Jets
Nawlins -4 @ Atlanta
NY Giants @ Philadelphia +3
I reery, reery, rike TB, Cle, and NO. A lot.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
It's not that tough
Can I just point out that all the "upsets" this season were only upsets because the pollsters decided, based on VERY LITTLE INFORMATION, that some team was better than another? Is anyone in doubt that any college football poll made before the first month of play is USELESS?! Ok rant over, I just wanted to point out how fun I think it is that the sports media slobbers over all the 'upsets' this year, when it seems to me about 90% of those upsets only prove how BAD the sports media is at ranking the teams. So the more upsets, the dumber the pollsters are proven to be.
On to the meat of our article:
A college football playoff system isn't that tough. Everyone has their ideas, so here is mine to add to the mix.
Let me mention first the "+1 model" is stupid. Many years you don't need a +1, so what then? Other years, when there are 3 teams who should get in (remember Auburn getting the screw job so OU could get embarrassed by USC?) then how do you figure fairly who plays first and who only has to play the second game? It's just a clumsy, half way bandaid that will create more problems.
Everyone knows the BCS is broken and terrible. Its defenders point out it's only supposed to match the top 2 at the end of the season, and it gets that right some % of the time. So we're to settle for a system that, for instance, lets Kansas and Illinois into the BCS games and keeps Missouri out, and on top of that, only gets the #1 vs #2 matchup right in the years no one needs a system to decide that game? Let's do better.
Here, my friends, is better. The greatest sport deserves a great ending.
Let's address the objections first, and then I'll show you how my system knocks out each of them.
#1. Players can't play any more games because of academics.
#2. Reporters, whose media influence and almost control these discussions, would lose influence and power when the polls aren't important, so they'll never be on board.
#3. A Playoff system would reduce the virtual sudden death nature of the regular season, which is where most of the drama comes from.
#4. The current bowl system makes too many people too much money, and so we can't get rid of it.
The easiest first. Academics and extra games are stupid excuses, and we all know it. Women athletes miss a lot more class days, not to mention Div II football has a playoff, and they need an education much more! Since far fewer of them make it to the NFL, see. Also, with 45 days between some teams' last game and their bowl, there's plenty of time to fit in some playoff rounds.
For the reporters and pollsters, we'll have role for them inside the system. Keep reading.
A Playoff system would NOT lessen the importance of the regular season. How are the ratings on NFL regular season games? Ding! How about having a 1 loss Texas team or a 2 loss LSU team playing in a title game? Ding! Looks like college games aren't important because of the sudden death nature, but because there are so few games, and the games themselves are so awesome. So if we had a playoff system implemented that kept the regular season important, wouldn't that make everyone happy?
Lastly, the bowl system. I think the fix on this one is to have a playoff system that either utilizes the current bowls, or leaves some meaningful bowl games outside the playoff that people still want to watch. What about a system that does both? Woohoo!
So here it is:
A. EVERY conference must play a conference title game. Only conference champions are eligible for the playoff.
This keeps the regular season meaningful and exciting. You have to win your division to get to the conf. title tilt, so you have to win most of your conference games. There are 11 conferences and a handful of independent teams. Let the indys figure out their own crap, and offer us up one team for our playoff. We now have 12 teams, sounding like a nice 8 team first round, with 4 byes, an 8 team second round, a 4 team semi and a 2 team TRUE title game! This also allows plenty of room for Boise State '06 style Cinderellas, and would let us all see Hawaii '07 get CRUSHED.
By the way, since all of these teams are in a bowl currently, that means of the 11 playoff games, only 5 are extra. So a playoff system with only FIVE extra games total, and no team playing more than 3 extra? Sweet!
Yes, the champion of the MAC will be worse then the 5th best team in the SEC. This helps us here in 2 ways: if you don't win your conference, you can't be national champion! Secondly, it leaves some REALLY good teams for some exciting bowl games.
B. The pollsters seed the bracket.
Now the pollsters are still important, as they decide who gets the 4 first round byes. This also underscores how important the regular season is. You don't want a loss to Stanford to drop you to the #6 seed, do you?
C. The existing bowls host the playoff brackets.
There are 11 playoff games, and currently 32 bowl games. If YOU were the San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl, would you rather have Western Bohunk A&T vs. the MAC #3 team, or USC vs Hawaii in a first round playoff game? Exactly. The other 21 bowls would get to untangle their traditional tie ins and make meaninfgul invitations. How about taking UGA this year and putting them up against Missouri? Neither is a conference winner, but are you telling me you wouldn't watch that game in the Cotton Bowl, for instance?
There you have it, simplicity and a playoff we can all get behind. The only opponents left, after my awesome explanation, would be the conference presidents. They want a system where a good conference gets in 2 or 3 teams, for the money. However, the point of my system is to TAKE AWAY the subjectivity! So you have to win your conference to go to the dance. No committees, no votes, no straw polls. Just teams that won, no arguments.
The only other reasonable option is having a 32 team playoff, with the polls deciding which teams are in, satisfying all the "our conference deserves 4 teams" issues, as well as using every single existing bowl.
For fun, here's how it would look this season under my system. Please tell me what you think in the comments, including what you like about it, how you would seed the teams if we could, and what problems I may not have addressed. I really, honestly believe this concept truly addresses all the issues I've ever heard raised about a playoff. It is time to stop letting subjective pollsters and coaches, and a computer which puts in some programmer's subjective criteria, decide the ending to our nation's best sport.
(note: I can't make the text here let me keep a bracket. I'm too dumb. So this is ugly, but you get the idea. Either email help with formatting, or shut up. Thank you.)
#1 OSU
______#1 OSU
BYE
____________________#5 USC
#5 USC
______#5 USC
#12 Bowling Green
____________________________ #4 Va Tech
#8 BYU
______#9 Navy
#9 Navy
____________________#4 Va Tech
#4 Va Tech
______#4 Va Tech
BYE
#3 Oklahoma
______#3 OU
BYE
_____________________#3 OU
# 10 UCF
_______#7 WVa
#7 WVa
_____________________________#2 LSU
#6 Hawaii
_______#6 Haw
#11 FlaInt
_____________________#2 LSU
BYE
_______#2 LSU
#2 LSU
How exciting does this bracket look? I don't care who Navy or BYU are playing currently, but I would love to see that matchup in a playoff. I take Navy in the upset, and I take USC to beat OSU, and VaTech to beat them.
In the other half of the draw, the Tigers and the Sooners would actually get to play. That might be my favorite game. You could talk me into different winners for both my semi finals, but this is my party and this is how I want it to happen. I take LSU to win the title, but couldn't you see USC, or VaTech, or OU getting hot and running all the way through? How GREAT would that be?
On to the meat of our article:
A college football playoff system isn't that tough. Everyone has their ideas, so here is mine to add to the mix.
Let me mention first the "+1 model" is stupid. Many years you don't need a +1, so what then? Other years, when there are 3 teams who should get in (remember Auburn getting the screw job so OU could get embarrassed by USC?) then how do you figure fairly who plays first and who only has to play the second game? It's just a clumsy, half way bandaid that will create more problems.
Everyone knows the BCS is broken and terrible. Its defenders point out it's only supposed to match the top 2 at the end of the season, and it gets that right some % of the time. So we're to settle for a system that, for instance, lets Kansas and Illinois into the BCS games and keeps Missouri out, and on top of that, only gets the #1 vs #2 matchup right in the years no one needs a system to decide that game? Let's do better.
Here, my friends, is better. The greatest sport deserves a great ending.
Let's address the objections first, and then I'll show you how my system knocks out each of them.
#1. Players can't play any more games because of academics.
#2. Reporters, whose media influence and almost control these discussions, would lose influence and power when the polls aren't important, so they'll never be on board.
#3. A Playoff system would reduce the virtual sudden death nature of the regular season, which is where most of the drama comes from.
#4. The current bowl system makes too many people too much money, and so we can't get rid of it.
The easiest first. Academics and extra games are stupid excuses, and we all know it. Women athletes miss a lot more class days, not to mention Div II football has a playoff, and they need an education much more! Since far fewer of them make it to the NFL, see. Also, with 45 days between some teams' last game and their bowl, there's plenty of time to fit in some playoff rounds.
For the reporters and pollsters, we'll have role for them inside the system. Keep reading.
A Playoff system would NOT lessen the importance of the regular season. How are the ratings on NFL regular season games? Ding! How about having a 1 loss Texas team or a 2 loss LSU team playing in a title game? Ding! Looks like college games aren't important because of the sudden death nature, but because there are so few games, and the games themselves are so awesome. So if we had a playoff system implemented that kept the regular season important, wouldn't that make everyone happy?
Lastly, the bowl system. I think the fix on this one is to have a playoff system that either utilizes the current bowls, or leaves some meaningful bowl games outside the playoff that people still want to watch. What about a system that does both? Woohoo!
So here it is:
A. EVERY conference must play a conference title game. Only conference champions are eligible for the playoff.
This keeps the regular season meaningful and exciting. You have to win your division to get to the conf. title tilt, so you have to win most of your conference games. There are 11 conferences and a handful of independent teams. Let the indys figure out their own crap, and offer us up one team for our playoff. We now have 12 teams, sounding like a nice 8 team first round, with 4 byes, an 8 team second round, a 4 team semi and a 2 team TRUE title game! This also allows plenty of room for Boise State '06 style Cinderellas, and would let us all see Hawaii '07 get CRUSHED.
By the way, since all of these teams are in a bowl currently, that means of the 11 playoff games, only 5 are extra. So a playoff system with only FIVE extra games total, and no team playing more than 3 extra? Sweet!
Yes, the champion of the MAC will be worse then the 5th best team in the SEC. This helps us here in 2 ways: if you don't win your conference, you can't be national champion! Secondly, it leaves some REALLY good teams for some exciting bowl games.
B. The pollsters seed the bracket.
Now the pollsters are still important, as they decide who gets the 4 first round byes. This also underscores how important the regular season is. You don't want a loss to Stanford to drop you to the #6 seed, do you?
C. The existing bowls host the playoff brackets.
There are 11 playoff games, and currently 32 bowl games. If YOU were the San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl, would you rather have Western Bohunk A&T vs. the MAC #3 team, or USC vs Hawaii in a first round playoff game? Exactly. The other 21 bowls would get to untangle their traditional tie ins and make meaninfgul invitations. How about taking UGA this year and putting them up against Missouri? Neither is a conference winner, but are you telling me you wouldn't watch that game in the Cotton Bowl, for instance?
There you have it, simplicity and a playoff we can all get behind. The only opponents left, after my awesome explanation, would be the conference presidents. They want a system where a good conference gets in 2 or 3 teams, for the money. However, the point of my system is to TAKE AWAY the subjectivity! So you have to win your conference to go to the dance. No committees, no votes, no straw polls. Just teams that won, no arguments.
The only other reasonable option is having a 32 team playoff, with the polls deciding which teams are in, satisfying all the "our conference deserves 4 teams" issues, as well as using every single existing bowl.
For fun, here's how it would look this season under my system. Please tell me what you think in the comments, including what you like about it, how you would seed the teams if we could, and what problems I may not have addressed. I really, honestly believe this concept truly addresses all the issues I've ever heard raised about a playoff. It is time to stop letting subjective pollsters and coaches, and a computer which puts in some programmer's subjective criteria, decide the ending to our nation's best sport.
(note: I can't make the text here let me keep a bracket. I'm too dumb. So this is ugly, but you get the idea. Either email help with formatting, or shut up. Thank you.)
#1 OSU
______#1 OSU
BYE
____________________#5 USC
#5 USC
______#5 USC
#12 Bowling Green
____________________________ #4 Va Tech
#8 BYU
______#9 Navy
#9 Navy
____________________#4 Va Tech
#4 Va Tech
______#4 Va Tech
BYE
#3 Oklahoma
______#3 OU
BYE
_____________________#3 OU
# 10 UCF
_______#7 WVa
#7 WVa
_____________________________#2 LSU
#6 Hawaii
_______#6 Haw
#11 FlaInt
_____________________#2 LSU
BYE
_______#2 LSU
#2 LSU
How exciting does this bracket look? I don't care who Navy or BYU are playing currently, but I would love to see that matchup in a playoff. I take Navy in the upset, and I take USC to beat OSU, and VaTech to beat them.
In the other half of the draw, the Tigers and the Sooners would actually get to play. That might be my favorite game. You could talk me into different winners for both my semi finals, but this is my party and this is how I want it to happen. I take LSU to win the title, but couldn't you see USC, or VaTech, or OU getting hot and running all the way through? How GREAT would that be?
Friday, November 30, 2007
Willie's Way of the Warrior
Oh yes, you've been waiting for it and now here it is. Our guest columnist has temporarily backed out, and so I am stepping in to write on some fine MMA action. Since I am not half as knowledgable of a fan, and about one third the writer that Phil is, you're going to get a very different MMA column than you would have.
See, we were all set to have "Phil's Phists of Phury!" run every couple of weeks, and we may still get that in the future. Right now I, your humble Willie, will fill in until that AWESOMELY named column becomes a reality. Now there are dozens of MMA sites out there, and one or two of them are really great. Mmamania.com is my favorite, and Yahoo Sports' UFC coverage as well as Sherdog are all three excellent. Those sites will give you your inside info, breaking news, and more. HERE you will get a big fan's perspective on MMA on TV, going on in the business, and most importantly, what big fights are coming up and why you should be excited!
So to kick things off I want to talk to the people who like boxing but don't like mixed martial arts. Look, I grew up a boxing fan. I watched old fights of many of the greats. I was a George Foreman fan when I was 8. Boxing is dead though, baby. D -E - D. Let's think about the biggest boxing match this year, maybe in 5 years, De La Hoya - Mayweather. What a terrible, garbage boring, tapfest. People think MMA is boring sometimes because 2 fighters are on the ground and not slugging away? Yeah let's compare two brutes with tiny gloves that are attempting to either elbow each other's faces open so badly they can't see through the blood - or catch the other in a submission hold and break his arm at the elbow. Let's compare that to two cats who wear gloves with 3/4 lbs of padding, and attempt to either tap each other enough times to outscore the other, or hug him until the ref makes them stop groping one another.
Pretty easy to see which one is more exciting. That DeLaHoya - Mayweather fight was terrible and boring. It was point sparring, the sort of boring thing you quit when you're 11 and your Mom makes you take Tae Kwon Do. No one was trying to win through superior strength or just a violent imposition of will, they just wanted to love tap the other guy until the judges gave them a win. Boo.
Look, boxing died 20 years ago, or more. The promoters keep any real fights from happening, there's too many groups claiming the world champ, and the crookedness is too deep. Let's just declare boxing dead, and move on to a real combat sport.
And now for something completely different.
I like The Ultimate Fighter TV show, but I think we're seeing some tires and lug nuts starting to fly. (That means the wheels have come off, for you Yankee readers). It's still great to see fighters thrown into this pressure cooker, great to see elite fighters coaching newcomers, and great to see guys fighting not for a big purse, but just for the chance to fight on the big stage. So how could we make the show more exciting? Part of searching for unknowns means you're going to have some fighters that just won't pan out, and I just don't want to watch those guys. How about we take 8 of the top teams or gyms in the business and have them send in their top prospects? Team Quest, Militech FS, Couture's gym, etc. etc. could all send in a guy. This would seem to help out the scouting process a lot.
Next time, we talk about big fights coming up, and how happy we are that TV show writers are not writing.
See, we were all set to have "Phil's Phists of Phury!" run every couple of weeks, and we may still get that in the future. Right now I, your humble Willie, will fill in until that AWESOMELY named column becomes a reality. Now there are dozens of MMA sites out there, and one or two of them are really great. Mmamania.com is my favorite, and Yahoo Sports' UFC coverage as well as Sherdog are all three excellent. Those sites will give you your inside info, breaking news, and more. HERE you will get a big fan's perspective on MMA on TV, going on in the business, and most importantly, what big fights are coming up and why you should be excited!
So to kick things off I want to talk to the people who like boxing but don't like mixed martial arts. Look, I grew up a boxing fan. I watched old fights of many of the greats. I was a George Foreman fan when I was 8. Boxing is dead though, baby. D -E - D. Let's think about the biggest boxing match this year, maybe in 5 years, De La Hoya - Mayweather. What a terrible, garbage boring, tapfest. People think MMA is boring sometimes because 2 fighters are on the ground and not slugging away? Yeah let's compare two brutes with tiny gloves that are attempting to either elbow each other's faces open so badly they can't see through the blood - or catch the other in a submission hold and break his arm at the elbow. Let's compare that to two cats who wear gloves with 3/4 lbs of padding, and attempt to either tap each other enough times to outscore the other, or hug him until the ref makes them stop groping one another.
Pretty easy to see which one is more exciting. That DeLaHoya - Mayweather fight was terrible and boring. It was point sparring, the sort of boring thing you quit when you're 11 and your Mom makes you take Tae Kwon Do. No one was trying to win through superior strength or just a violent imposition of will, they just wanted to love tap the other guy until the judges gave them a win. Boo.
Look, boxing died 20 years ago, or more. The promoters keep any real fights from happening, there's too many groups claiming the world champ, and the crookedness is too deep. Let's just declare boxing dead, and move on to a real combat sport.
And now for something completely different.
I like The Ultimate Fighter TV show, but I think we're seeing some tires and lug nuts starting to fly. (That means the wheels have come off, for you Yankee readers). It's still great to see fighters thrown into this pressure cooker, great to see elite fighters coaching newcomers, and great to see guys fighting not for a big purse, but just for the chance to fight on the big stage. So how could we make the show more exciting? Part of searching for unknowns means you're going to have some fighters that just won't pan out, and I just don't want to watch those guys. How about we take 8 of the top teams or gyms in the business and have them send in their top prospects? Team Quest, Militech FS, Couture's gym, etc. etc. could all send in a guy. This would seem to help out the scouting process a lot.
Next time, we talk about big fights coming up, and how happy we are that TV show writers are not writing.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Peek at the Pros
Let's get some discussion going on the NFL action. Given my mediocre record at picking the Pros vs the spread, you can tell me in the comments why I'm wrong to be so excited about these games.
Detroit @ Minnesota -3.5 = Lions getting worse, Vikes getting better. The O-line for the Vikings seems to make every RB look good, and their D improves each week. The Lions seem to be all tires and lug nuts -- wheels coming off.
NYJ +1.5 @ Miami = Lookit, I don't care how bad the Jets are, Miami is going to have to sign an RB off the street. They'll probably end up with one of those guys who models for video games and carries around a highlight clip of himself from Div II college ball.
Cleveland +1 @ Arizona = So after losing to the 49ers, the Cards are going to beat one of the best offenses in League. Yyyyyyeah.
SF +3 @ Carolina = This is a pick made mostly by me not believing Carolina, a QB-free team, can beat anyone.
Denver -3.5 @ Oakland = The Raiders are poop. Denver bounces back this week from a tough late loss to Chicago.
Tampa Bay +3 @ New Orleans = TB runs it well, and Nawlins can't stop the run. Their inconsistent O and whether Jeff Garcia can go for the Bucs will determine this pick. Right now I am going with the Buccaneers.
Detroit @ Minnesota -3.5 = Lions getting worse, Vikes getting better. The O-line for the Vikings seems to make every RB look good, and their D improves each week. The Lions seem to be all tires and lug nuts -- wheels coming off.
NYJ +1.5 @ Miami = Lookit, I don't care how bad the Jets are, Miami is going to have to sign an RB off the street. They'll probably end up with one of those guys who models for video games and carries around a highlight clip of himself from Div II college ball.
Cleveland +1 @ Arizona = So after losing to the 49ers, the Cards are going to beat one of the best offenses in League. Yyyyyyeah.
SF +3 @ Carolina = This is a pick made mostly by me not believing Carolina, a QB-free team, can beat anyone.
Denver -3.5 @ Oakland = The Raiders are poop. Denver bounces back this week from a tough late loss to Chicago.
Tampa Bay +3 @ New Orleans = TB runs it well, and Nawlins can't stop the run. Their inconsistent O and whether Jeff Garcia can go for the Bucs will determine this pick. Right now I am going with the Buccaneers.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Last shot at college
Well we're just crashing here at the end of the season, making your comments even more important. A good discussion and a good consesns will make this final week a strong finish!
I'm going to pick EVERY game right now, we'll talk about them, and then at the end of the week I'll post the final picks that are worth playing.
VaTech -4.5 @ BC = BC does not like defenses that are aggressive, and their special teams are weak. BeamerBall is all about special teams and B-E-ing aggressive.
Tenn @ LSU -7.5 = At Knoxville, I would pick the Vols. I think LSU will win, but their D can give up points, and man can UT score them. In Atlanta though, I have to take the tigers. I'd like it a lot more at 6.5.
OrgSt @ Oregon off = Is the line up yet?
UCLA @ USC -20 = At USC, with no healthy UCLA QBs, with USC wanting to prove they're worthy of a Rose Bowl bid. Buh bye, Bruins.
BYU -14.5 @ SDSt = SD State is baaaaaaaad. BYU puts up poiiiiiiiiiiiiints.
Pitt @ WVu -28 = I hate lines this big. Say they're up 24 and put some starters on the bench? Of course, we saw what they did to UConn, and Pitt is doodoo compared to the Huskies.
OU @ Mizzou +3 = I love Bob Stoops, but I am blown away by Chase Daniels. I don't think OU's D can stop the Tigers from scoring any number of points, but certainly within 3 of the Sooners. Yes, I know they beat em before, but all the Mo is on Mizzou's side now.
AZ @ AZSt -6.5 = AZ has been coming on, but ASU handles them at home. I like this line.
Wash +13.5 @ Hawaii = The Rainbow Warriors can win, but not by 2 TDs. They have had close ones vs WAC foes, and even in an off year, the Huskies are still PAC 10 caliber.
I'm going to pick EVERY game right now, we'll talk about them, and then at the end of the week I'll post the final picks that are worth playing.
VaTech -4.5 @ BC = BC does not like defenses that are aggressive, and their special teams are weak. BeamerBall is all about special teams and B-E-ing aggressive.
Tenn @ LSU -7.5 = At Knoxville, I would pick the Vols. I think LSU will win, but their D can give up points, and man can UT score them. In Atlanta though, I have to take the tigers. I'd like it a lot more at 6.5.
OrgSt @ Oregon off = Is the line up yet?
UCLA @ USC -20 = At USC, with no healthy UCLA QBs, with USC wanting to prove they're worthy of a Rose Bowl bid. Buh bye, Bruins.
BYU -14.5 @ SDSt = SD State is baaaaaaaad. BYU puts up poiiiiiiiiiiiiints.
Pitt @ WVu -28 = I hate lines this big. Say they're up 24 and put some starters on the bench? Of course, we saw what they did to UConn, and Pitt is doodoo compared to the Huskies.
OU @ Mizzou +3 = I love Bob Stoops, but I am blown away by Chase Daniels. I don't think OU's D can stop the Tigers from scoring any number of points, but certainly within 3 of the Sooners. Yes, I know they beat em before, but all the Mo is on Mizzou's side now.
AZ @ AZSt -6.5 = AZ has been coming on, but ASU handles them at home. I like this line.
Wash +13.5 @ Hawaii = The Rainbow Warriors can win, but not by 2 TDs. They have had close ones vs WAC foes, and even in an off year, the Huskies are still PAC 10 caliber.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Rivalry Week head start
This is where we start the discussion for the coming week. I like the following picks, but maybe not enough to play them just yet. We'll look more in depth as the week progresses. For now, you guys load up the comments with your opinions!
USC @ AZ St +3.5 Especially in Tempe, I just don't see how USC wins this game. Too green.
TX -5.5 @ A&M Earlier in the year, I thought this would be the only game the Aggies could win in November. As the season progressed, and Colt McCoy refused to start sucking as bad as I thought he would, and Fran found a way to suck even more than I thought he could, I just can't take the Aggies here. Texas is a much better team this year than last, and the Ags are at best the same, but most likely worse. Make room for Tubberville and $4 mil/season!
BoiseSt +4 @ Hawaii I have been looking forward to this matchup all season, and I've been saying that even with Colt Brennan in there the Warriors couldn't beat the Broncos. Now with Colt being concussed, I don't think the outlook is better for them. Note to Moms: naming your kid Colt is a guarantee of a concussion for him on a nationally televised college football game. (See also McCoy, Colt).
Mizzou @ Kansas -2 I believe in coach Mangiant!
UConn +17 @ Wvu I deeply loathe the Huskies cheating football team, but I have little confidence in the Mountaineers to win this game by more than 10.
Miami @ BC -14.5 I could be talked out of this one, but really, Miami is GAR- BIJJ.
UGA -3.5 @ GaTech This line is this low because it's a rivalry game, but the Dawgs are the 2nd hottest team in all of America (Kansas) with the 2nd best player in the sport (Tebow).
Oregon -2 @ UCLA Even sans-Dennis, UCLA can't keep up with the Ducks.
FSU @ Fla -13.5 Fsu just isn't so good, and Florida is. The spread is big though.
Clemson -3 @ SoCar I do like Spurrier (I do!) but Clemson is too much for them.
USC @ AZ St +3.5 Especially in Tempe, I just don't see how USC wins this game. Too green.
TX -5.5 @ A&M Earlier in the year, I thought this would be the only game the Aggies could win in November. As the season progressed, and Colt McCoy refused to start sucking as bad as I thought he would, and Fran found a way to suck even more than I thought he could, I just can't take the Aggies here. Texas is a much better team this year than last, and the Ags are at best the same, but most likely worse. Make room for Tubberville and $4 mil/season!
BoiseSt +4 @ Hawaii I have been looking forward to this matchup all season, and I've been saying that even with Colt Brennan in there the Warriors couldn't beat the Broncos. Now with Colt being concussed, I don't think the outlook is better for them. Note to Moms: naming your kid Colt is a guarantee of a concussion for him on a nationally televised college football game. (See also McCoy, Colt).
Mizzou @ Kansas -2 I believe in coach Mangiant!
UConn +17 @ Wvu I deeply loathe the Huskies cheating football team, but I have little confidence in the Mountaineers to win this game by more than 10.
Miami @ BC -14.5 I could be talked out of this one, but really, Miami is GAR- BIJJ.
UGA -3.5 @ GaTech This line is this low because it's a rivalry game, but the Dawgs are the 2nd hottest team in all of America (Kansas) with the 2nd best player in the sport (Tebow).
Oregon -2 @ UCLA Even sans-Dennis, UCLA can't keep up with the Ducks.
FSU @ Fla -13.5 Fsu just isn't so good, and Florida is. The spread is big though.
Clemson -3 @ SoCar I do like Spurrier (I do!) but Clemson is too much for them.
Report Card full of sadness and rage
Our first losing week of the entire college season! 5-6 in college, but in a painful way. 3 of those were by teams ahead in the score but not on the spread who knelt it out in the opponent's red zone! Yeah, that sucked. Sucking more would be picking a 4 game parlay, which has a reward of 10:1, picking the first 3 games right, then having the 4th game win by 5 when the spread was 6, and your team with the ball on the bad guys' 25 with 2 minutes left.
In the NFL, another week of not quite winning and just barely losing, at 3-3. We hopped on the Pats' bandwagon with Towelie just before kickoff. Adjusted for units, the NFL weekend was slightly on the + side.
Thanks to our friend the Paki for a hot NBA tip late Saturday. Houston - McGrady = mediocre.
Only a couple of weeks left to win in the college ranks, because I'm not a big fan of Bowl game point spreads. With the wide variance in time off, hard to find common points of comparison, etc. etc., bowl games are for suckers.
While we're at it, the bandwagon bets (defined as any game with 66% of public consensus on one side of the spread) was 9-6 this weekend. That 60% win rate is not too shabby. Maybe next week we'll just take the bandwagon bets and pick those games.
In the NFL, another week of not quite winning and just barely losing, at 3-3. We hopped on the Pats' bandwagon with Towelie just before kickoff. Adjusted for units, the NFL weekend was slightly on the + side.
Thanks to our friend the Paki for a hot NBA tip late Saturday. Houston - McGrady = mediocre.
Only a couple of weeks left to win in the college ranks, because I'm not a big fan of Bowl game point spreads. With the wide variance in time off, hard to find common points of comparison, etc. etc., bowl games are for suckers.
While we're at it, the bandwagon bets (defined as any game with 66% of public consensus on one side of the spread) was 9-6 this weekend. That 60% win rate is not too shabby. Maybe next week we'll just take the bandwagon bets and pick those games.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)