[sdtnvols42]

It appears to me that Power Rankings are used to create Week #1 Lines. The Books must have a historical figure that helps them average Week 1 Lines. Week 1 seems a great place for Traps for Big Fav's. It seems Week 1 is tougher on teams coming out of summer practice positions getting settled. Maybe Big Fav's are more vulnerable when it comes to covering large numbers. Coaches looking at pulling starters for cup cake games since there is no real reason to run up 70 points on a cup cake? I notice some wise cappers skip Week 1 period. What are your thoughts?

[littlekona]

parlay Northwestern and Ole Miss both will roll by 4 tds or more

[ChuckyTheGoat]

Any historical data on this? My thoughts on BigFavs and times to go Against them:

1) In Lookahead spots. See OhioSt at Indiana. Huge game w/ Okla on deck. Have to be healthy for the Sooners. Might pull starters a bit early.

2) Check the Non-conf game track record. If a team beats over-matched opponent too badly, Favorite knows they can't schedule that team again.

Just my 2-cents.

[Covering the #]

I tend to look for a big dog getting 2 tds or more that play on national tv like ESPN, ABC, Fox or CBS. Dogs cover more often than not it seems. I don't have any numbers to back this up, just from memory. And yes, look ahead spots also a factor. Indiana qualifies for this tomorrow, but I'm staying away from the spread due to ex head coach now the OC for OSU. So a revenge factor could be in play. I do like the under for the game though.

[gojetsgomoxies]

interesting ideas....... i do think that the line is basically last years power rating with modest adjustments. somewhat analogous to what you said.

i will do some checking..........

[gojetsgomoxies]

http://killersports.com/ncaafb/query...+S+D+Q+L+%21++

seems like that filter has way too many games qualifying but i guess alot of FBS teams play lower level teams week 1....

i would look at it somewhat on team-by-team basis. i.e. coach general strategy. coaches of course change but i do think the situations are often similar. i.e. boise favored by 30 points week 1.

on a gross basis, all i could find was that very big favourites are 51% ATS week 1. and that's AFTER line movements which can be large. most of the large filters i used were 50% ATS.......

[sdtnvols42]

http://killersports.com/ncaafb/query...+S+D+Q+L+%21++

seems like that filter has way too many games qualifying but i guess alot of FBS teams play lower level teams week 1....

i would look at it somewhat on team-by-team basis. i.e. coach general strategy. coaches of course change but i do think the situations are often similar. i.e. boise favored by 30 points week 1.

on a gross basis, all i could find was that very big favourites are 51% ATS week 1. and that's AFTER line movements which can be large. most of the large filters i used were 50% ATS.......

Nice Work

[gojetsgomoxies]

http://killersports.com/ncaafb/query...+S+D+Q+L+%21++

spread > 35 points. favourites, week 1............. by season........ note that given the giant spread that there haven't been that many games to play

and of course this is consistent with what alot of my research finds........ going back 15 years. giant favourites were excellent plays, then they were poor plays, then they were excellent plays again. 50%ish last year. so is there enough there for a pattern or is it just randomness/small sample size?...... i think the answer is a little of both.

a complete technical question: on these databases, what is week 1? is this weekend week 1? (and they just throw last week's few games here).......... or is this week 2?......... i did run week 1 and week 2 and eyeballing it it looked pretty similar to the week 1 screen (as it partially should as week 1 is half the sample or something like that)

[gojetsgomoxies]

making the point spread favourite larger, here are good and bad teams as big favourite week 1.

good:

GTech
stanford
texas tech
mtsu
miss state

note that i think that 3 of those 5 teams are high powered scoring "system offense" teams

also good: MF, rutgers, ok state..

bad:

oregon - they've been bad ats any games these days.

AF
houston - really bad
az state
nebraska
wis - quite bad, i find that surprising.
mcs

note: minimum 3 ats games. and average cover had to be consistent with record...... but basically many of those teams are 1-2 or 2-1 ATS in these games. so very small sample size.