[The Seer]

**This is NOT a gloat. I just hate seeing guys bet games based solely on line movement.

Auburn had the better D line, better O line, better players, and the best player on the field. Let's not forget they played a much tougher schedule and played in epic battles all season. 5.1 yds per carry vs 2.3 yds per carry pretty much explains it. The score was much closer than the game. Oregon pulled out all stops with fakes and going for it on 4th downs & were still taken out of their game.
Line movement can be deceiving. I've done it before & got burned & don't like seeing fellow posters falling for it either. we're all here to make $.



edit: I posted the same analysis before the game here for those of you that will say it's easy to say after the game:
http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/players-ta...ml#post8301690

[mmike032]

Auburn had the better D line, better O line, better players, and the best player on the field. Let's not forget they played a much tougher schedule and played in epic battles all season. The score was much closer than the game. Oregon pulled out all stops with fakes and were still taken out of their game. Line movement can be deceiving. I did it myself in the Stnford/VT game instead of trusting myself.

some of us didnt overlook this
LOS was dominated by AU as I expected

[paco]

Auburn D played perfect Seer :

[mmike032]

Ducks averaged 300 something rushing YDs a game.
did they break 100 tonight?

[KKoz9]

Was waiting for the first I told-you-so-after-the-fact post.

Even game could have gone either way, especially if they tackle the dude and don't give 35 free yards.

[Wreckloose]

Oregon had lots of negative runs in other games I watched, just were able to break big ones. I'm glad they kept trying the zone read instead of throwing more.

[southpaw74]

Should have gone to overtime. That's impressive considering auburn seemed to be much better all around.

[brooks85]

I know you guys won so you are excited but you won a coin flip. The under was the play.

[The Seer]

Was waiting for the first I told-you-so-after-the-fact post. Even game could have gone either way, especially if they tackle the dude and don't give 35 free yards.

aub should have won by more, just telling people not to base their betting solely off line movement. I've got burned doing it before too & learned my lesson.

[Brock Landers]

had Auburn at -2, was glad to see it wasn't -3

That was a hell of a fun game

[Vol_Bengal]

honestly... Auburn had 3 different drives from mid 3rd thru 4th quarter to put em away and let em stay around... should have been up 15 by mid 4th quarter honestly. I liked Auburn though. Best offensive player, best defensive player, and best offensive and defensive lines... that is where championships are won.

[brooks85]

so oregon stopping auburn on those drives had nothing to do with it?



oregon failed to score from a few yards out and did not settle for a fg, there is 3 easy points off the board they could have had, changes a lot of things. This game was a coin flip.

62% were on auburn ats
68% were on oregon ml

[Capybara]

Well, it's easy to say that Seer, but in general, when the public is 60% on one side (Auburn here) and the line is flying the other way -- really flying -- the sharps are on to something.

I agree that in this case it seemed to make no sense -- taking the team with the softer schedule from the softer conference -- but following RLM like that, you'll win more than you lose. That's all.

[The Seer]

Ducks averaged 300 something rushing YDs a game.
did they break 100 tonight?

LaMicheal James 49 yds

[paco]

aub should have won by more, just telling people not to base their betting solely off line movement. I've got burned doing it before too & learned my lesson.

Cash it baby!

Brooks is right, under was the real play especially with these teams having a month to prepare as I posted in my thread!

[The Seer]

Well, it's easy to say that Seer, but in general, when the public is 60% on one side (Auburn here) and the line is flying the other way -- really flying -- the sharps are on to something. I agree that in this case it seemed to make no sense -- taking the team with the softer schedule from the softer conference -- but following RLM like that, you'll win more than you lose. That's all.

Capy, many bowl games this year would have got you buried following RLM

[Naz18]

SEC

[brooks85]

i know i wont ever bet against an sec team in the championship game tho

[Domer]

I love the rocket scientists that analyze which side is the correct one after the game has been played.

[KKoz9]

aub should have won by more, just telling people not to base their betting solely off line movement. I've got burned doing it before too & learned my lesson.

Gotcha bout the line movement. Irrelevant in my opinion.

Don't forget that Oregon turned ball over twice in the red zone...so don't know that Auburn should have won by more, if should have at all.

I saw it as pretty even game overall. I was on the under so don't really have any agenda here.

[notsosharp]

The field was atriocous. Players falling down every play. congrats auburn backers.

[The Seer]

I love the rocket scientists that analyze which side is the correct one after the game has been played.

I listed all of the same facts BEFORE the game, mr observant.
http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/players-ta...ml#post8301690

[GoldRush7]

I was on Auburn and I can honestly say there were multiple plays in the game that could have changed the outcome. I am glad I was on the side I was, but there was no way to tell what was going to happen honestly.

[talnted]

indeed auburn has way more talent then oregon so this victory really isn't very surprising. amazing game

[BiffTFinancial]

Capy, many bowl games this year would have got you buried following RLM

UConn, Michigan, Virginia Tech, Michigan State, Penn State....

[jashtonrich]

it was a great game would have liked ot though since its the last game of the year

[talnted]

I love the rocket scientists that analyze which side is the correct one after the game has been played.

boo hoo you had oregon

[beerman2619]

i love clowns like this that start threads like this after game was over. A 3 point game and some clown brags about how he knew the outcome of the game. When the outcome could of easily went the other way. Way to go what a sharp play

[BadNina]

As a true Bama fan I could not find it in me to pull for Auburn. But I did bet on them. Naturally they screwed me over since I had them at -3. Typical.


but I won betpoints on them at +1. I think John is still bitter over the beat down on his Long Horns last year against the SEC.

[The Seer]

i love clowns like this that start threads like this after game was over. A 3 point game and some clown brags about how he knew the outcome of the game. When the outcome could of easily went the other way. Way to go what a sharp play

hey jerkoff, read post #22. You musta blindly followed the linemovement

[No coincidences]

I did it myself in the Stnford/VT game instead of trusting myself.

Why do you keep using this as a reference point? Stanford opened at -1 and was immediately pounded up.

As for this game, Auburn was the better team -- but don't act like this was a slam dunk. Despite that and Oregon playing like total dogshit, it still came down to the final play.

If Kelly kicks the stupid fvcking field goal instead of going for it from the 1, this thread may not have existed.

[ronjon619]

the ORE QB had to have played his worst game.

[No coincidences]

UConn, Michigan, Virginia Tech, Michigan State, Penn State....

Late money was on Oklahoma, Stanford was pounded up from an open of 1, and late money was on Bama.

I'd cite Miami (Ohio) before anything if you want to make an anti-RLM argument. And RLM isn't 100% -- not sure why people who like to throw it under the bus assume line watchers think otherwise. It's not smart to regularly bet against it -- that's all I'd say.

[tltaylor89]

Coin flip my ass Auburn was bigger up front

[talnted]

Coin flip my ass Auburn was bigger up front

thank you. and the talent on auburns side defensively and offensively was undeniably dominant.