So...UCLA Benefits by LOSING Tomorrow?

[RogueScholar]

And what better way to define "better" than who would be favored on a neutral field? You keep harping on ONE game. And where do you get off calling me a 48% capper? Because I am 48% through 82 games this year? So my past 55% seasons don't count? Or the fact that this would be my second losing CFB season out of seven at SBR? You better get your facts straight before attacking me son.

Not to kick you while you're down LT, but could you post a recap of your season by season records of posted plays here at SBR? I respect your dedication to the craft of gambling and to this forum, but I also have to admit that I've never seen you "tear up" any sport since I joined in 2007. It's true you've had a lot of winning seasons in many sports, but most that I've seen were small unit gains reflecting an ROI <2%. I could be wrong of course, I can't say I care in the least about following anybody's plays but my own, and I have to concede a general distaste for touts as well. Seeing as how Sam's impugning your skills, I think just posting all your records would be far better ammunition than the verbal pissing match you're having now.

I think this was a great thread, BTW. I'm an Oregon State alum so I was quite myopic about tomorrow's action, not even realizing the ramifications it would have on next week's conference title game. This is a good angle to contemplate, although I'm sure by the time the outcome of the Civil War becomes clear, the value will have already been sucked out of the Stanford/UCLA line. You have to be able to determine the probabilities of each team winning before the day's action starts in order to get some value for yourself, IMO.

P.S. I'd leave Sagarin out of any future gambling arguments. Any public model out there is literally decades behind what any successful originator is using.

[CanuckG]

Stanford better than ORE because of one fluke game

[SamDiamond]

Tex A&M beat Alabama in Tuscaloosa are they better?

I agree Oregon is the better team. They didn't execute well on offense, give credit to the cardinal. Their run defense was somewhat exposed too. A neutral field line would be at least 9.

The "better" team doesn't always win. And sometimes the better teams reads the paper about how good they are and how they are 20 point favorites and takes a solid opponent too lightly.

I like Stanford and the Under 51.5. Stanford has rushed for over 200 yards in the last 2 of 3 and had over 200 yards last year vs UCLA. I think the game goes similar to last year where Stanford wore down UCLA with superior line play. They have beaten the Bruins 70-19 combined score in the last two and no reason to think this won't follow the same script.

Completely disagree. Objectively, what makes Oregon the better team?

Is it the fact they run up scores on teams? Is that what makes them better? Or are we simply saying "BUT THE POWER NUMBERS SAY OREGON's BETTER!!!".

Because that is what this comes down to. Power numbers, or numbers used to generate lines. That's it.

And, it even gets cloudier then. Sagarin's model is ancient. It's 30 years old. He's the only model that still has Oregon ranked ahead of Stanford among the BCS computer models. Every other model has Stanford ahead of Oregon.

So, why does Sagarin warrant such a position in these models? Because middle aged gamblers say so. That's 'bout it. No offense to the middle aged amongst us.

[darrell74]

Don't get cute LT
just cap the game as if they both want to win

If this was the NFL, I'd say," yeah, UCLA will pull their starters in the 2nd half to get ready for the playoffs."

But this is college, they will play to win, cap it as such
don't get cute, this is how you give money back to the books- overthinking the irrelevant

[Optional]

What time do we find out if UCLA are starting their best lineup or resting players?

[yisman]

Every other model has Stanford ahead of Oregon.

False. Billingsley has Oregon 4, Stanford 8.

[JohnnyBrooklyn]

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$= STANFORD..............=UCLA

[GatorFan]

Just forget about this f*cking game. There are many more games out there to cap for today...anyway if gun on my head, i'll take Stanford - points.

[SamDiamond]

False. Billingsley has Oregon 4, Stanford 8.

I mistakenly thought it was Sagarin who had Oregon ahead of Stanford. It wasn't him, it was Billingsley.

In Sagarin's adjusted BCS standings--ELO_Chess, he has Stanford #4 and Oregon #5.

What I wrote stands. There is only one computer BCS poll that has Oregon ahead of Stanford.

And it was Billingsley not Sagarin.

Broken down:

Anderson and Hester--- Stanford #6 Oregon #7
Colley Matrix------------ Stanford #5 Oregon #6
Ken Massey------------- Stanford #5 Oregon #6
Wolfe-------------------- Stanford #5 Oregon #8
Sagarin------------------ Stanford #4 Oregon #5
Billingsley------------------Stanford #8 Oregon #4

http://espn.go.com/college-football/bcs

[broadway6]

someone just tell me why UCLA would risk a 5 game winning streak and momentum? im not saying UCLA wins, but no way in hell they let Stanford win, so they don't have to play Oregon.

[yisman]

What I wrote stands.

What you wrote was wrong.

Sagarin's more accurate (non-BCS) formula has Oregon ahead.

Billingsley's BCS formula has Oregon ahead.


And just about every serious CFB model (not the BCS crap, which ignores MoV) has Oregon ahead.

[badhunter]

Yeah Stanford must be better. That's why the Cardinal is 8 in the BCS and Oregon 5! Lol! The Ducks would beat Stanford 8 out 10 times.

[SamDiamond]

What you wrote was wrong.

Sagarin's more accurate (non-BCS) formula has Oregon ahead.

Billingsley's BCS formula has Oregon ahead.


And just about every serious CFB model (not the BCS crap, which ignores MoV) has Oregon ahead.

Which "serious" cf models would those be exactly?

Do tell.

Let me guess. Yours and LTProfits?

[LT Profits]

Which "serious" cf models would those be exactly?

Do tell.

Let me guess. Yours and LTProfits?

It seems to me you are overlooking the only thing that matters. If Oregon played Stanford on a neutral field right now, Oregon would be around a -6 favorite. That is the ONLY thing that matters and is the very definition of "better" in the most objective sense with no "opinion" being brought into the equation. You keep bringing in peripheral noise that really has nothing to do with the conversation. Or maybe we are using different definitions of "better". I am defining it objectively, you are bringing in subjective opinion. Now has Stanford closed the gap, certainly, they would have been -14 last week. Do you have the right to bet Stanford +6 because you subjectively "feel" they are better, absolutely, I have no problem there. But I would not call a team better until it would be favored over the other team on neutral.

[daimoshokage]

With all the bickering.. will someone give the play.. what's the fukking play???

[suicidekings]

The original point is 100% correct. Playing the PAC12 Title Game against Stanford is a much better option for UCLA than having to face Oregon. Oregon is the better team, and a single outcome doesn't negate that point... With that in mind I played the Cardinal -1 right when the line opened, and in my mind, it was the best play on the board this weekend.

I don't see the point in arguing with anyone that disputes the simple math here of whether Oregon is a tougher opponent than Stanford. Waste of time...

[LT Profits]

With all the bickering.. will someone give the play.. what's the fukking play???

Stanford -140 ML (from someone that rarely lays over -130) I went ahead and put it in without waiting for Oregon result.

[zoo youk]

Ducks up early 20-7

[chico2663]

fuk off. i have enjoyed it you fuking douche!

[Goat Milk]

It seems to me you are overlooking the only thing that matters. If Oregon played Stanford on a neutral field right now, Oregon would be around a -6 favorite. That is the ONLY thing that matters and is the very definition of "better" in the most objective sense with no "opinion" being brought into the equation. You keep bringing in peripheral noise that really has nothing to do with the conversation. Or maybe we are using different definitions of "better". I am defining it objectively, you are bringing in subjective opinion. Now has Stanford closed the gap, certainly, they would have been -14 last week. Do you have the right to bet Stanford +6 because you subjectively "feel" they are better, absolutely, I have no problem there. But I would not call a team better until it would be favored over the other team on neutral.

Books make mistakes, profits. Their "opinions" take subjectivity into account. They account for public perception. Why else do you think the Thunder were favored over the Miami Heat in the NBA finals? Because they were the better team? Yeah right--if you interviewed 40 nba coaches before that series 30 of them would pick miami to win.

[CanuckG]

Books make mistakes, profits. Their "opinions" take subjectivity into account. They account for public perception. Why else do you think the Thunder were favored over the Miami Heat in the NBA finals? Because they were the better team? Yeah right--if you interviewed 40 nba coaches before that series 30 of them would pick miami to win.

Didn't OKC have home court advantage? Of course public perception is apart of it...but If it's the other way around Heat are slight favorites. Put OKC/Miami on a neutral court in Idaho and Miami is obviously a fav just like you put ORE on a neutral field vs Stanford and ORE is a fav.

[Inkwell77]

fukk Oregon

That is all I can fukkin say.

Fukk these clowns.

Please fukkin lose UCLA.

[Tony Truong]

I'm confused.

Didn't Stanford settle this issue last week @ Eugene?

Why would playing Oregon be more difficult than playing Stanford?

Let me ask you this. You're focusing on Oregon's offense.

Which defense would you rather face, Oregon's or Stanford's?

Hey Sam ! How many years that you play the Foot Ball gamebling ? If you want to know Oregon 's or Stanford 's I think better you ask the LAS VEGAS ! OK? Good luck !

[paranoyd androyd]

Yeah Stanford must be better. That's why the Cardinal is 8 in the BCS and Oregon 5! Lol! The Ducks would beat Stanford 8 out 10 times.

well, stanford is already 1-0 against oregon so you're saying they'd go 1-8 in the last 9 games? lmfao stop being so fukkin stupid. stanford dominated oregon in every meaningful statistic with a one dimensional offense and freshman qb in eugene.

[naslax13]

i would want to play oregon. not because its easier but because ur in college and you want to win a big game like that, not toss a game and settle for an easier bowl game.

[LT Profits]

i would want to play oregon. not because its easier but because ur in college and you want to win a big game like that, not toss a game and settle for an easier bowl game.

You have it backwards. UCLA would get an easier bowl game if the win today and then lose to Oregon in the Pac-12 Championship. If UCLA loses tonight and then beats Stanford in the rematch in the P-12 Championship, they go to a BCS bowl.

[nvrlose37]

Someone want to tell me where kick catch interference was? Looks like the refs sucking the Cardinal chode today anyway.

[Sunde91]

Interesting to see this 2nd half line. Stan should be about -.5 or pk at worst. Will be telling if it's -3

UCLA seriously has to wise up at this point down 11 knowing Oregon lost

[yisman]

line was PK

I probably should've bet it but I laid off. I bet under 26 -120 instead.

[Trident]

well, stanford is already 1-0 against oregon so you're saying they'd go 1-8 in the last 9 games? lmfao stop being so fukkin stupid. stanford dominated oregon in every meaningful statistic with a one dimensional offense and freshman qb in eugene.

I would hardly call that being dominated in every meaningful statistic.

[broadway6]

Nice call LT. Shame we can not watch a rematch of Oregon vs. Stanford, guess we can pound UCLA +9.5 next game

[Big Bear]

UCLA ML for me.

[broadway6]

LT- i will admit, i was wrong. UCLA definitely didn't show up last weekend.... look @ 2 post above this one...

[RogueScholar]

LT,...could you post a recap of your season by season records of posted plays here at SBR?

Any luck on assembling these? You bring it up often when your opinions are contradicted on the forum, I figured you'd be eager to trot them out.