Explain three lines to me

[No coincidences]

Michigan State -7.5 at Pinny (only book to close above 7)
Cincinnati -6.5 against a ranked team at home in Rutgers
Bowling Green -3 against a ranked team at home in Kent State

I say this every week -- are books just OK with giving away free money in college football? How can books be so sharp with NFL sides and this off with the college game? You used to be able to count on taking unranked home faves like the Bearcats and Falcons, because there was a reason why they were favored. Not anymore. As for MSU going above a key number at the sharpest shop in the world only to lose SU, again, just amazing.

Congrats to Northwestern, Rutgers and Kent State + ML backers. It truly was that easy.

[No coincidences]

You can throw Mississippi State in there too. RLM my ass.

[Romanov]

Middle Tenn St too. Lets see how that one plays out

[tto827]

LA Tech later today, college sports is where the money is to be made.

[No coincidences]

Middle Tenn St too. Lets see how that one plays out

I didn't even play the four games I mentioned. I would normally hammer those and be 0-4 right now. I've learned that college football is a paradise for Joe Blow and I barely even bother anymore.

I had a few friends of mine ask me specifically about the Michigan State and Rutgers games this morning. I was going to tell them to lay off given the way the line moved in favor of MSU at Pinny (again, I can't emphasize enough how big it is for them to close at -7.5) and the "unranked home favorite" theory that has been tried and tested through the years re: Cincy, but I just ended up telling them "take 'em both." Sure enough, they cash with ease SU.

[No coincidences]

college sports is where the money is to be made.

Wasn't like this until last year.

The past two seasons have just been amazing to me. Week after week.

[suicidekings]

Because in the minds of most CFB bettors, a team's reputation weighs more heavily than current form.

Case in point, 75% laying -4 on USC today. That line was a joke, although admittedly I didn't expect it to be 17-0 Bruins after 1Q.

[No coincidences]

Because in the minds of most CFB bettors, a team's reputation weighs more heavily than current form.

Case in point, 75% laying -4 on USC today. That line was a joke, although admittedly I didn't expect it to be 17-0 Bruins after 1Q.

But who is betting on Michigan State, Arkansas or Cincinnati today? That's the point -- those weren't the plays of most people who just spend 5 seconds looking at a game. Northwestern, Mississippi State and Rutgers were. So why are the books opening and then moving these lines the way they are?

"Most CFB bettors" are cleaning up on these horrific lines.

[suicidekings]

Wasn't like this until last year.

The past two seasons have just been amazing to me. Week after week.

There's been a fundamental shift in the way the market works in the last few years as the books have caught up to the "playing against the public" bullshit that all the talking heads and self-proclaimed "sharps" promote. The bettor demographics have also changed because of UIGA and an increased interest in sports betting as an investment platform from working professionals with sizable amounts of money to work with.

Brave New World.

[suicidekings]

But who is betting on Michigan State, Arkansas or Cincinnati today? That's the point -- those weren't the plays of most people who just spend 5 seconds looking at a game. Northwestern, Mississippi State and Rutgers were. So why are the books opening and then moving these lines the way they are?

"Most CFB bettors" are cleaning up on these horrific lines.

What do you expect the books to do though? It's not in their best interest to make substantial changes to how they set the opening lines when the current short term trends oppose their long term projections? Everything comes back to the mean eventually, and the changes they make are year to year, not week to week, especially in something as volatile as college football.

[No coincidences]

What do you expect the books to do though? It's not in their best interest to make substantial changes to how they set the opening lines when the current short term trends oppose their long term projections? Everything comes back to the mean eventually, and the changes they make are year to year, not week to week, especially in something as volatile as college football.

Why would MSU open as a -6.5 fave vs. Northwestern? And more importantly, why would the sharpest book in the world move them to -7.5?

Same goes for Cincinnati. A -6.5 favorite at home against a ranked Rutgers team? Really?

[suicidekings]

The favourites were set where they were because Rutgers can't score and MSU has smothering defense.

If the Spartans had gotten the TD instead of the safety early in the game, we probably wouldn't even be talking about this outcome. They also turned the ball over 4 times, well outside a reasonable expectation for the game.

You're talking about this like you've forgotten how incredibly volatile the game of football can be...

[No coincidences]

The favourites were set where they were because Rutgers can't score and MSU has smothering defense.

If the Spartans had gotten the TD instead of the safety early in the game, we probably wouldn't even be talking about this outcome. They also turned the ball over 4 times, well outside a reasonable expectation for the game.

You're talking about this like you've forgotten how incredibly volatile the game of football can be...

MSU rarely plays Northwestern well, and has been incredibly bad in close games year. I watch quite a bit of Big Ten football, and why they would be more than a 4-point fave here was baffling to me.

[No coincidences]

Might as well add Ohio State +3 to the list.

Obviously money came pouring in on the Buckeyes, but why did they open at +3 in the first place?

[suicidekings]

Might as well add Ohio State +3 to the list.

Obviously money came pouring in on the Buckeyes, but why did they open at +3 in the first place?

100% agreed on this one. I hit the Buckeyes immediately when the line originally opened as a HUGE mistake. However if you look at how the books have lined OSU's games this season, they've been getting too much respect against bad teams and not enough against the more competitive teams.

[No coincidences]

100% agreed on this one. I hit the Buckeyes immediately when the line originally opened as a HUGE mistake. However if you look at how the books have lined OSU's games this season, they've been getting too much respect against bad teams and not enough against the more competitive teams.

No reason for this game to open as anything more than PK. None.

[suicidekings]

No reason for this game to open as anything more than PK. None.

Bielema is a loser, who's deficiencies become very apparent when the Badgers play elite teams.

I wonder if Badgers cry?

[No coincidences]

Bielema is a loser, who's deficiencies become very apparent when the Badgers play elite teams.

I wonder if Badgers cry?

Bielema is in fact a loser. Agree 150%.