[TheProdigy8199]

I understand that everyone has their opinions and own ways of capping football games. Everyone always thinks they are on the right side, and tries to come up with ways to back their opinions. I get that.

All this week we have seen the dogs cash the ticket. Ohio beat Temple, Tulsa beat UCF, and everyone thought the better team lost. I see alot of people are jumping on Colorado tonight; is it because the home team have been live dogs this week?? I guess I just don't get it.

Everyone is banking on Colorado to cover based on the assumption that USC is gonna come out flat after their game against Stanford. People think that the altitude will effect the way they play, they are saying that an imaginary snowstorm is going to bury the stadium...whatever the reason I guess my question is what if that stuff doesn't happen?? Does Colorado still cover?

Each game comes down to match-ups. Both Ohio and Tulsa matched up well with their opponents, thats why they covered the spread, those games were a pretty much coin flips on who would win. USC/Colorado there should be no debate on who will win outright. Everyone was riding high on BC last night as the home dog against FSU...GOY's, LOY's all over the place, even some people on the BC ML...and everyone saw what happened in that game. USC/Colorado game is pretty much the same deal...clearly a mismatch...I don't believe anyone thinks that Colorado stands a chance for the outright win, they are just hoping that they don't get blown out.

Basing your play solely on an assumption that a certain situation is going to happen and it doesn't can make all the difference in a game. People thought Pierce was going to have a moster running game because there were pro scouts in the stands and he was Temple's key to victory and he was held to what...30 yrds on the ground??? Maybe if he had more production they would have won the game but the assumption that he would didn't come through. Everyone assumed that because UCF has only allowed 7 points at home this year that they were going to shutdown Tulsa's offense and thats how they'd win, that didn't happen either.

So what if USC comes out to play tonight...they don't have a hangover, it's not snowing and the altitude doesn't affect them. Does Colorado still have a chance?? This is just another example of a bad match up...I'd rather back the clearly better team than hope that Colorado catches a break out of their control.

[Rambo]

[TheBetBuysDanK]

great points. thanks for the write up. .

still, CLASSIC let down spot after a 3OT game that was essentially USCs GOY. I understand what your saying though. personally, I dont hold the USC coaching staff in high enough regard to feel confident they wont come out flat against pac10 whipping post Colorado.

I will likely lay off this spread. I may bet the UNDER or Colorado TT OVER.

[beerman2619]

Actually Colorado getting there best two players on offense helps with there cover. Not to mention USC's injuries and suspensions for a half. Will see what happens but with 80 percent of the public on USC they are a

[SBRMAN23]

Your right set. Agree got them in a small parlay

[BigAl21]

This is like saying tebow and the broncos will never lose at home

[TheProdigy8199]

great points. thanks for the write up. .

still, CLASSIC let down spot after a 3OT game that was essentially USCs GOY. I understand what your saying though. personally, I dont hold the USC coaching staff in high enough regard to feel confident they wont come out flat against pac10 whipping post Colorado.

I will likely lay off this spread. I may bet the UNDER or Colorado TT OVER.

I do see the argument about it being a Classic Let down spot here...but I guess I'm just HOPING that doesn't happen...

[fatty mcgoo]

I agree with your points. Everyone is forgetting how USC has been performing these past couple of weeks. This is a young team who has gained a lot of experience these past couple of weeks going into South Bend and winning, then taking Stanford to a 3 OT loss. This team might come out slow, but they got plenty of weapons to get this cover. Lets see Matt Barkley, Marquise Lee, Robert Woods, Curtis McNeal (who might want to makeup for his costly fumble), and even Mark Tyler. The defense has been coming along the past couple of weeks as well, so keep this in mind when making your bets tonight.

PS Colorado is at the bottom of the barrel in the PAC-12

[ebbearsfb1]

Barkley is playing for nfl scouts if he knows what's good for him he will come out juiced

[Serbone]

Dont be tempted.
The three skill players coming back for Colo will not be at 100%, those with leg inj cannot possibly be able to play at full speed for the whole game.
USC will let down but they are young with a new coach (jerk) who will drive them, USC is a big time program under the microscope by alumni and fans and the kids are playing for NFL scouts and competing for playing time and I just think they will be too much for Colorado. Do you think the Colorado fans will be pumped? I don't.
Yes, there have been some upsets this week, but NI was the biggest and hey they were understimated, great SR QB and "O". Tulsa was only 2 pt dog. Ohio was small 3.5 home dog.
USC can play with almost anybody, other than ALA, LSU, OK ST I think they could stick close to anyone else competitively or even beat them. Boise, OK, Stanford (already did), Wisc, Ore, all of 'em.
Whereas Colorado is THE bottom of the barrel. No "D" at all.
And the "public" malarky.
The so called "public" won last night with all three... Miami (O), Fla St, Tulsa (slightly) were the side most bet upon. At least the data base I looked at... they are not all the same. So none of that nonsense about the "public" being wrong. Last nite the public went 3-0, 100%, is that good enough?????????????
USC - 20.