Picks

[Gamblinmann]

tread very carefully from this point out... if your first win was a tainted gift from the gambling gods, LOL

Oh have no doubt my friend that they will take it back. Just a matter of time.

[JayDr3am]

colorado state is interesting cause they letting the hook hang and is probably not gonna change it. i like Colorado state here too BOL

keep an eye on the games this season where the home team is consistently hanging the hook (-3.5) with no chance of budging .. theres alot more to it than just how basic i made it seem.. just keep those games highlighted

[Gamblinmann]

Well, I guess my 45+ was dead on.

[Gamblinmann]

Umm, that 45+ was a misprint as I meant 55+

[Gamblinmann]

Had a few beers, some pizza and celebrating with a blue Cohiba. Nice to capp a game so dead on. But, the thing that has always sucked about doing this is there is no time for a pat on the back. CSU is in the rear view and now it's all about South Florida.Hope everyone is have a great opening day!

[Gamblinmann]

Well after being down 16-0 which with the -20 was down 36-0 I will gladly take the push. Helluva day!

[BigdaddyQH]

You can thank Charlie Strong, undoubtedly one of the worst Head coaches in Football, for losing you some rather easy money. Had he properly prepared his team, this game would have been a rout. Instead, they come out like they are in a trance, and cost a lot of people money because the ones who waited until the last minute to play this game lost their tales. That fool cost me a perfect start, because I had Hawaii and Colorado State also. 2-0-1 is a good start, but not as good as 3-0.

[Gamblinmann]

You can thank Charlie Strong, undoubtedly one of the worst Head coaches in Football, for losing you some rather easy money. Had he properly prepared his team, this game would have been a rout. Instead, they come out like they are in a trance, and cost a lot of people money because the ones who waited until the last minute to play this game lost their tales. That fool cost me a perfect start, because I had Hawaii and Colorado State also. 2-0-1 is a good start, but not as good as 3-0.

Yes sir, I was fortunate to get the push and I do agree with you that Charlie Strong is a douche. He pulled his starters one series to soon and instead of making a dominate statement, no one is gonna clap for a 20 point win over a bad team.

[Gamblinmann]

2-0-1 +$400 with pending $50 3 team parley now a 2 team parlay thanks to the push on SF. Need Louisville to bring it home.

[JayDr3am]

You can thank Charlie Strong, undoubtedly one of the worst Head coaches in Football, for losing you some rather easy money. Had he properly prepared his team, this game would have been a rout. Instead, they come out like they are in a trance, and cost a lot of people money because the ones who waited until the last minute to play this game lost their tales. That fool cost me a perfect start, because I had Hawaii and Colorado State also. 2-0-1 is a good start, but not as good as 3-0.

i mean you cant blame anyone for taking arguably the worst coach in college but yourself. out of all the posters i didnt expect you to fall for that bull shit lol that game was clear as day. good call on hawaii though

[Gamblinmann]

Colorado St +6.5 vs Colorado $115-100
Colorado St +7 vs Colorado $120 to win $100 ( I used a couple of offshore books hence 2 bets)

I made these during the 4th quarter of yesterday's game. I have 2 angles I really love in this one. First is the revenge angle from the Rams getting embarrassed last season by Colorado. Public perception does play a role in setting the spreads and last season's game set this one. However, the WRONG team is favored.

My second angle here is Colorado lost 8 guys off a good D including 3 studs in their secondary. Now they have to come right out of the box and play one of the best offenses in the country. Remember, many thought Oregon St had a very good D before yesterday, but as I predicted, they were freaking DESTROYED. The Rams put up some video game numbers with 526 total yds. This is not a one dimensional offense as they ran for a buck ninety one while Stevens was 26-39 for 334.

What was even scarier is the Ram offense had those numbers despite some procedure penalties that killed a few drives and some early mistakes probably chalked up to first game jitters. Now this offense has a game under their belt going up against a Buffs D that has 8 new starters. What I really loved about the Ram offense is that despite OS shading a safety to wherever Gallup was to help out the CB, Colorado St still found creative ways to put the ball in his hands. It really is pick your poison for a D coordinator cause the other Ram skill guys are really good.

As for the Ram D, better than what was expected and being able to take the ball away was huge. They did have problems with Nall in the 1st half but that guy is a beast. The Colorado offense is an above average one so I expect them to put some points up to. Over might not be a bad play here also. In the end, I expect an even better outing by the Ram offense and Colorado St wins this straight up, but I'll take the points.

[BigdaddyQH]

Many may have THOUGHT that Oregon State had a very good defense, but I was the one that told you that Oregon State was over rated. Colorado is a lot better than Oregon State, but like Oregon State, may also be over rated. Their offense is not all that people think it is. They were held to 17, 10, and 8 points in losses to USC, Washington, and Oklahoma State a team with a non-existent defense. They were also held to 20 points by UCLA and 10 by Stanford. Colorado State retruns a decent defense, though they did not look like it in the first half yesterday. They should improve with a game under their belts now. The play is not only Colorado State +7 (if you can find it) but the Under with the Total. The Total is up to 65 1/2 now and climbing. The loser in this Interstate rivalry has not scored more than 27 points in the past 9 seasons and has averaged 16 points in those 9 games. The total has gone over 60 just once in the past 10 games. Some people do not take past history and use it when they are making wagering decisions. They are the people who are overall losers, and who have to lie to break even. We KNOW who they are.

[Gamblinmann]

Many may have THOUGHT that Oregon State had a very good defense, but I was the one that told you that Oregon State was over rated. Colorado is a lot better than Oregon State, but like Oregon State, may also be over rated. Their offense is not all that people think it is. They were held to 17, 10, and 8 points in losses to USC, Washington, and Oklahoma State a team with a non-existent defense. They were also held to 20 points by UCLA and 10 by Stanford. Colorado State retruns a decent defense, though they did not look like it in the first half yesterday. They should improve with a game under their belts now. The play is not only Colorado State +7 (if you can find it) but the Under with the Total. The Total is up to 65 1/2 now and climbing. The loser in this Interstate rivalry has not scored more than 27 points in the past 9 seasons and has averaged 16 points in those 9 games. The total has gone over 60 just once in the past 10 games. Some people do not take past history and use it when they are making wagering decisions. They are the people who are overall losers, and who have to lie to break even. We KNOW who they are.

We were indeed simpatico on our CSU play

[Gamblinmann]

Oklahoma St -18 vs Tulsa $150 to win $136

Should have jumped on this at -17, my bad. Continuing my love affair with high octane offenses, the Cowboys just might be in the top 5 in the nation. What I like about Mason Rudolph at QB is ball security. Last season had a 28/4 tds.picks ratio while throwing for 4000+ yds. At WR Okie St has the deepest group in the country. Washington says he's playing despite the old hernia issue so I'll take the man at his word.

At RB as a freshman, Hill ran for 1142 yds and now with experience he should be even better which gives the Cowboys a dual threat offense and opens up my favorite play call, play action pass. They go up against a Tulsa D who lost several of their stud players from last season. I believe Rudolph and company can play name the score. 60+ would not shock me.

On offense, Tulsa has not named a starting QB. I have been around long enough to know it's coach speak for neither guy jumps out. They do have a very good RB but the Cowboy strength on defense is their strong D line. Okie st has a less than average secondary but the Cowboy weakness on D will not be exposed against a revamped Hurricane offense.

Tulsa is 7-18-1 ATS vs the Big 12

The home team is 6-2 ATS

[JMF2479]

Big daddy I like the little history lesson, I am on top of it. thank you...

Gamblinmann, I like this play too. I am glad to see you are on it....

[Gamblinmann]

Big daddy I like the little history lesson, I am on top of it. thank you...

Gamblinmann, I like this play too. I am glad to see you are on it....

Good luck this coming week.

[Gamblinmann]

BC-2.5 vs NIU $116 to win $100

Gonna change up my love of offense and play this one based on DEFENSE. BC was the 7th ranked D vs the run last season giving up under 109 pg. They get most of their guys back including one of the best pass rushing DEs in the country. NIU lost most of their WRs so the first game of the season is not conducive to establishing an air attack. BC has a very physical front 7 and I just don't see the Huskies matching that physicality on either side of the ball.

In a low scoring pound the rock game, the physical team has an advantage. The Eagles bring 4 back on the Oline and Wade might be able to make a few plays in the passing game. BC should be able to wear down the NIU D and have success in the 4th quarter when this game will be decided.

Boston College is 7-1-1 ATS in their last 9 against the MAC.

[BigdaddyQH]

The line on the Colorado-CSU game has dropped to Colorado -4 1/2 at some Vegas shops now. The total is now up to 66. Interesting.

[Capitols44]

Many may have THOUGHT that Oregon State had a very good defense, but I was the one that told you that Oregon State was over rated. Colorado is a lot better than Oregon State, but like Oregon State, may also be over rated. Their offense is not all that people think it is. They were held to 17, 10, and 8 points in losses to USC, Washington, and Oklahoma State a team with a non-existent defense. They were also held to 20 points by UCLA and 10 by Stanford. Colorado State retruns a decent defense, though they did not look like it in the first half yesterday. They should improve with a game under their belts now. The play is not only Colorado State +7 (if you can find it) but the Under with the Total. The Total is up to 65 1/2 now and climbing. The loser in this Interstate rivalry has not scored more than 27 points in the past 9 seasons and has averaged 16 points in those 9 games. The total has gone over 60 just once in the past 10 games. Some people do not take past history and use it when they are making wagering decisions. They are the people who are overall losers, and who have to lie to break even. We KNOW who they are.

I dont understand how can games be related to each other from years ago when they have different coaches and coaching staff and players ? Did you even consider how the weather was for each of those 10 games that was played in the past ? Also did you consider if the teams had injuries or players suspended ? The question i have tell the whole story.

[Gamblinmann]

The line on the Colorado-CSU game has dropped to Colorado -4 1/2 at some Vegas shops now. The total is now up to 66. Interesting.

I knew it was gonna drop like a fat whore through a cheap bed. I was fortunate to get the lines I got.

[BigdaddyQH]

I dont understand how can games be related to each other from years ago when they have different coaches and coaching staff and players ? Did you even consider how the weather was for each of those 10 games that was played in the past ? Also did you consider if the teams had injuries or players suspended ? The question i have tell the whole story.

You obviously have not been wagering on football for a long time, or wagering on any game of chance. If you have been, you will know the golden rule about wagering. NEVER wager against a streak. The reason is simple. If you wager on a streak, you can win as long as the streak stays alive, and only lose ONCE. If you wager against the streak, you can lose game after game and only win ONCE.

Next. You answered your own question. You said that the coaching staffs and players were all different. As far as players go, that happens every year. Yet with all of these changes, the facts remain the same. Ever wonder why?

[Capitols44]

You obviously have not been wagering on football for a long time, or wagering on any game of chance. If you have been, you will know the golden rule about wagering. NEVER wager against a streak. The reason is simple. If you wager on a streak, you can win as long as the streak stays alive, and only lose ONCE. If you wager against the streak, you can lose game after game and only win ONCE.

Next. You answered your own question. You said that the coaching staffs and players were all different. As far as players go, that happens every year. Yet with all of these changes, the facts remain the same. Ever wonder why?

You say never wager against a streak tell that to the guys who bet that there would be no overtime in last years super bowl. After 50 years the streak was broken.

[Gamblinmann]

You obviously have not been wagering on football for a long time, or wagering on any game of chance. If you have been, you will know the golden rule about wagering. NEVER wager against a streak. The reason is simple. If you wager on a streak, you can win as long as the streak stays alive, and only lose ONCE. If you wager against the streak, you can lose game after game and only win ONCE.

Next. You answered your own question. You said that the coaching staffs and players were all different. As far as players go, that happens every year. Yet with all of these changes, the facts remain the same. Ever wonder why?

Damn that brings back a fond memory. I was in the old Stardust sports book (I miss that place) one hot summers eve. Was trying to decide on a baseball wager when some old broken down gambler who heard me muttering to myself (you could just see it in his eyes) asked me if I was stupid. One team had a 13 game winning streak and I was gonna bet against 14. He said "son, never bet against a streak, in fact ride it until it plays out". So I put $200 on that team and they made it 14. I wanted to go back and give him something but the following morning I was on a plane back to Chi-town..........

[Gamblinmann]

NOTE: Since I have been accused of lying, I have to resort to this childish nonsense. I have no image posting icon, so I have no clue how to post a picture of my bets. However, anyone wanting proof of a bet I post should just message me. I can take a pic with my phone, send it to my email address and forward it to you.

[Notorious_Donk]

Nice write ups Gamblinman. I see you are new here but do you have any historical results on your football betting?

[ZINISTER]

Let me spare you the trouble of convincing these SBR people. They will say they are fake tickets blah blah blah. Don't bother! Why care what some degen thinks.

NOTE: Since I have been accused of lying, I have to resort to this childish nonsense. I have no image posting icon, so I have no clue how to post a picture of my bets. However, anyone wanting proof of a bet I post should just message me. I can take a pic with my phone, send it to my email address and forward it to you.

[2daBank]

You obviously have not been wagering on football for a long time, or wagering on any game of chance. If you have been, you will know the golden rule about wagering. NEVER wager against a streak. The reason is simple. If you wager on a streak, you can win as long as the streak stays alive, and only lose ONCE. If you wager against the streak, you can lose game after game and only win ONCE.

Next. You answered your own question. You said that the coaching staffs and players were all different. As far as players go, that happens every year. Yet with all of these changes, the facts remain the same. Ever wonder why?

Dude that is fukkin ridiculous, "never wager against a streak". No way you questioning someone else's experience level then spouting off that fallacy. I don't care if the roulette wheel has hit black 100x in a row or your coin has landed on tails 100x in a row that does not make the likelihood of the next spin any greater or less than the 100 before.

"You can win as long as steak stays alive and only lose once, if you wager against you can lose multiple times.".. again pure nonsense, you can only make one wager at a time on or against it and neither is more likely than the other so your chances of winning or losing are the same.

I know you are not new to this so I know you understand this, "past performances does not guarantee future results"..

[2daBank]

Let me spare you the trouble of convincing these SBR people. They will say they are fake tickets blah blah blah. Don't bother! Why care what some degen thinks.

As zin says who gives a shit. Honestly it nobodies fukkin business how much you wager per game anyways. Certainly no reason to cater to some asshat worried about something that none his business.

[Smutbucket]

Welcome to the forums, Gamblin. Refreshing to see new guys post write ups instead of just picks. Good luck on the season and join along in my thread for discussion and I'll frequently drop by here . With you on bc but I bought at 3, finishing up my write ups for early games and posting later today .

[Gamblinmann]

Nice write ups Gamblinman. I see you are new here but do you have any historical results on your football betting?

My intent here was to discuss CFB plays in a forum with knowledgeable people. I have been searching for over a year now. I did not want to distract from the purpose of a forum which is to gather perspectives and try to make a few bucks but most of all, have some fun. All I want to say is this, (and I hope my feelings can be respected), I do have a solid history and track record, but I am honest enough to admit, I cracked under the pressure of always having to be right because so many were counting on me. That is on me and something I have to find a way to live with.

My gambling history can be summed up in 2 old sayings:

1- Be kind to the people you meet on the way up cause you meet them again on the way down.

2-Be careful what you wish for.

I pick games for myself now, not a recommendation to anyone else.

[Gamblinmann]

Let me spare you the trouble of convincing these SBR people. They will say they are fake tickets blah blah blah. Don't bother! Why care what some degen thinks.

Your right and I should never let some a-hole upset me. I guess I am still a little shell shocked from past history.

[Gamblinmann]

As zin says who gives a shit. Honestly it nobodies fukkin business how much you wager per game anyways. Certainly no reason to cater to some asshat worried about something that none his business.

Thank you

[Gamblinmann]

Welcome to the forums, Gamblin. Refreshing to see new guys post write ups instead of just picks. Good luck on the season and join along in my thread for discussion and I'll frequently drop by here . With you on bc but I bought at 3, finishing up my write ups for early games and posting later today .

Thank you and I look forward to reading your write ups

[Gamblinmann]

Ok, back to focusing on the games.

Texas-17 vs Maryland $110 to win $100

The Terps have QB issues which is never a good sign when going to a hostile environment in game 1. Whomever gets the start, will be looking over his back every time a mistake is made. That is to much pressure for most QBs. This play comes down to a few specific points for me. The Terps will depend on the run game. So can a horrible Texas run D from last season, stop them? Word out of fall camp is they are much improved and you have to consider the Charlie Strong factor in evaluating them last season. IF, the Longhorn D is better as I suspect, then how will Maryland have any offense?

I was very impressed with Buechele last season. Yep, he did have a bit of the Favre syndrome in him where he makes a throw and you say "wow", and then he makes one and you say "WTF". Hopefully with some maturity and experience under his belt, he understands the Aaron Rodgers ball security mantra. Texas avg'd 32 ppg and 239 on the ground and they go up against a Terps D that allowed 214 pg and ranked 99th in run D. The latest on Warren is he probably plays but concussions are serious so him playing not a sure thing. Still, Texas has a bevy of good backs. Herman is an offensive guru and giving him an offense that can run and pass is like an old man taking a few grand to his favorite brothel. No matter how he spends his cash, he will go home happy.

[Gamblinmann]

This is my "what the hell were you thinking bet". I made this one early in the month and that 2 point drop has me worried. Also, as mentioned, I need this for my 2 team parlay win. I have little confidence in this bet!

Louisville-26.5 vs Purdue $220 to win $200

After re-capping this game yesterday, I came away wondering what I based this bet on so I went looking for my notes and my reasoning was this: Brohm is a good HC but when you are implementing a quick temp spread offense in year 1 with a questionable QB, a new WR corps and the old regime's recruits, I just see no way this offense clicks the first time out. The Cardinal D blew chunks last season but their secondary is the strength. I also see a weak ground game for the Boilermakers.

What I did miss was the state of Louisville's WRs in this one. I'm not sure who Lamar throws to. Then again, if I have any chance in this one, it will be on the legs of Mr Jackson. Purdue's weakness has been they get the bottom of the recruiting barrel. If you are very smart, you go to ND. The rest go to IU. Purdue always appears slow to me and their LB corps are all much slower than Jackson. I need him to have one of those 200 yds rushing and 6 td kind of days. I also will need that Cardinal D to rebound this game and hold Purdue to 17 or less.