| Profile | Entries | Thread Author | Posts | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
replied to
NPD Bowl System that hit over 70% for all bowl games last year and 11-0su/10-1ats in the college playoff.
in College Football Quote Originally Posted by ayashifx55:
Quote Originally Posted by smellybunty: Quote Originally Posted by Brewmeister: Line movement to -4 indicates sharps are on USF... Line started at -7.5 maybe thats why USF lost. Maybe we gotta use this NDP system + big line movements. For example, USF moved from -7.5 to -3 , it had the higher NDP but the line movement indicated otherwise. LOSS Delaware indicated higher NDP AND the line movement went to almost PK (+1.5) , i believe it was like +4 or +5 WIN eshady stated that the system breaks once one side has lots of missing players. USF had a ton of injuries + I think a lot of people underestimated how big of an impact not having Bynum playing + missing coaches effected them. The coaching decisions and play calling was really shakey all game. |
eshady29 | 150 |
|
|
replied to
NPD Bowl System that hit over 70% for all bowl games last year and 11-0su/10-1ats in the college playoff.
in College Football Quote Originally Posted by eshady29:
@Cupcaking It doesn’t apply to the coaches being out just the players. I hope that clears everything up . gotcha, so today the system says USF? |
eshady29 | 150 |
|
|
replied to
NPD Bowl System that hit over 70% for all bowl games last year and 11-0su/10-1ats in the college playoff.
in College Football Quote Originally Posted by wantwinners:
The plays r Delaware and south Florida. South Florida game is tricky because of both qb situations but that’s what the system says eshady also said that if a side has more than five injuries or opt outs to important pieces of the team then it’s a no play. USF - starting QB out, HC, O line coach, OC are out. There are other injuries as well, but not sure of their importance.
|
eshady29 | 150 |
|
|
replied to
NPD Bowl System that hit over 70% for all bowl games last year and 11-0su/10-1ats in the college playoff.
in College Football @eshady29
Quote Originally Posted by eshady29:
@Cupcaking Yes…. It’s a no play if there are 5 or more players out on the team that the system picks. good to know.. thanks! |
eshady29 | 150 |
|
|
replied to
NPD Bowl System that hit over 70% for all bowl games last year and 11-0su/10-1ats in the college playoff.
in College Football @eshady29 Tomorrow USF vs Old Dominion
USF 1.27 Old Dominion 1.17
USF - Starting QB sitting out. Head coach and OC not there.
Old Dominion - Starting QB sitting.
both sides have inexperienced backup QBs. question, you would still go with the team with higher NPD or does this game have too many variables that you would sit it out? |
eshady29 | 150 |
|
|
This is really anyone’s game.
both teams trying to give it away lol |
Cupcaking | 25 |
|
|
Jax state’s entire offense is predicated on being able to run it down the opposing teams throat. Without that, they are screwed. |
Cupcaking | 25 |
|
|
@Brewmeister Yeah, I know. sorry, he hasn’t been in the game yet. |
Cupcaking | 25 |
|
|
Cam Cook is a late scratch? He hasn’t taken a snap yet. |
Cupcaking | 25 |
|
|
Over on the service bowl? not arguing, I’m wondering what your logic is because this game is always a slow grinding slugfest. it’s gone under 10 out of the last 11. |
Luv2Win06 | 14 |
|
|
Seems like a 50/50 split amongst Tulane and N.Texas bets |
Mardyball | 41 |
|
|
Kennesaw is the better squad. But, they lost their earlier matchup due to four turnovers. Kennesaw only lost by 9 with those four turnovers.
If KS can protect the ball. They should win and cover |
MWNII | 2 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by SportsIntuition:
He is just an average capper but textbook narcissist - holier than thou after a win and insults others after a loss. He went on quite a run during 23-24 season. His 24-25 was so bad. I don’t think he’s a bad capper. He based his picks on advanced metrics and used the NFL’s paid film service, which lets you watch every player on every play across all coverages. His process was extremely thorough. Like with any form of capping, variance and luck play a role, and the 2024–25 season simply didn’t break his way. I’m speculating here, but it seems his system didn’t factor in situational “good spots” for teams, likely because that kind of context introduces variance that can’t easily be quantified. I’m guessing this because there were several games last season that were clear spot bets, yet he sided the other way because the opposing teams held advantages in most key metrics. |
CCK | 43 |
|
|
He is on X/Twitter He still gives soccer selections, his original bread and butter. He didn’t say, but it sounds like his NFL season last year kind of soured him on betting this league. |
CCK | 43 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by Knollywood100:
The question I have regards the Texans D. Their stats show they're dominant. But look at the teams they've played. I'm not disputing the fact they have a quality D, but Buff is a horse of a different color. Anyone else feel this way? Kincaid and Coleman out. Shakir back. Buffalo with less receiving targets and a very good Texans defensive group that can get pressures without blitzing meaning more players to drop back. Very good at stopping the run. Texans are also much better at home. to answer your question, I have no answers. lol |
Maukaboy | 12 |
|
|
This should be a no bet, Mac team laying 33points? Really really really bad football team trying to cover 33 points?
|
BiaSaigon | 22 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by spottie2935:
Stanford/Cal absolutely the right play is only on Stanford. That being said it’s not one of the greatest plays in my eyes this week. It’s a bad team with a low line. They have to win and to be comfortable I like this team to have a 10 point lead at some point. They did have that 10 point lead vs FSU in a home dog game but that line was +17 much better line for a cushion. Stanford was also +14 vs Boston College. I much prefer those type of games and lines when getting on a bad team. I just don’t trust them to win when the line cushion isn’t present. I know I know cal is off a huge dog win and traveling and all the good quality stuff that makes a good bet but this Stanford team can blow all these intangibles away and lose. t:team=STAN and H and 6>line>-10 and season>2022 the last 3 seasons Stanford has only been line at home between-10 and +6 in those games they are 1-2 SU 1-1 as favorites. Stanford is a bad team with a low line playing a bad team off a big win. Cal is in a terrible situation but is Stanford good enough to take advantage with very small line cushion. pass for me.
Yeah, I agree here. To add, Cal always loses after a big win. But, like Scottie said I just don’t trust them to exploit Cal. This is a really bad football team. Just to add to the mix, this is a big rivalry game. Trends don’t really matter much. For me personally it’s hard to bet against the better QB and better offense of Cal’s. Cal also has the best receiver in the game in De Jesus. I think the defenses are a wash. |
Yanasaur | 48 |
|
|
@spottie2935 Traveling? Cal is 25 miles or less from Stanford. |
Yanasaur | 48 |
|
|
I’ve watched every Cal game this year and probably half of Stanford games. The key is beating Cal is being able to rush on them. Stanford’s rush game is not really good. If Stanford has to put it in the air they are pretty much playing into Cal’s strength. Wilcox was a corner in his playing days so he always has a competent secondary group. I don’t have a lean yet, but giving you some perspective on the matchup. Look back at all of Cal’s wins and losses. Cal wins when they can stop the run. Cal loses when they can’t. I haven’t seen anything from Stanford that tells me they can run. Stanford put up 37 rushing yards on SJ state, one of the worst defenses in all levels. |
Yanasaur | 48 |
|
|
@shadowmagic808 To be fair to yourself.. Raiders covered previous two against much better teams than Dallas.
I’m a Raiders fan, so I watch them a lot and I don’t trust them worth shit.
|
Digitalkarma | 74 |
|
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.