Early line: Bama favored by 24.5 over Monroe
- Thread starter JD95
- Start date
Yep, but I think that HI and Vandy are both better than 5 teams still on our schedule this year. We get 7, the question is whether or not we get more. We have been beating the teams that we are supposed to beat (even if we keep them agonizingly close). I just wish that the piggies could be included in that group. Right now, I'd say that they will likely be favored...
Last edited:
Bama 24
ULM 20
Bama stops ULM with time running out with a interception in the end zone. Why should we change the routine from the first to games...LOL. But seriously I think we win by 20....RTR
ULM 20
Bama stops ULM with time running out with a interception in the end zone. Why should we change the routine from the first to games...LOL. But seriously I think we win by 20....RTR
Because of Bama's 2 subpar performances Vegas has set a very low line (24.5) for this game. If you are a gambler, and I am, take Bama -24.5 and take em hard. THIS IS A LOCK.
ULM is the worst overall team Coach Shula has faced. And he will not let up for any reason this week just to get some of you/us off his back. Call it in early as this one will be up to 26 or 27 by kickoff.
:BigA:
I don't think Bama can score 24. Maybe not even 1/2. The offense is not so good and the defense is suspect at best.
I don't think Bama can score 24. Maybe not even 1/2. The offense is not so good and the defense is suspect at best.
Oh come on...realistically people...La. Monroe!
Yes, they almost beat Kansas last Sat, but still...La Monroe.
Vandy is good enough to win 5(!) games this year, and Hawaii is probably an 8 or 9 win team...and after the Vandy game Bama is now 4-17 against the spread our last 21 SEC home games and just 2-9-1 against the spread the last 12 games against Vandy!
With that said...Bama is overdue for a few TDs...
Bama 38 La. Monroe 13
Yes, they almost beat Kansas last Sat, but still...La Monroe.
Vandy is good enough to win 5(!) games this year, and Hawaii is probably an 8 or 9 win team...and after the Vandy game Bama is now 4-17 against the spread our last 21 SEC home games and just 2-9-1 against the spread the last 12 games against Vandy!
With that said...Bama is overdue for a few TDs...
Bama 38 La. Monroe 13
There is no such thing as a lock. It's gambling. The bookies are not stupid. They set the lines to even the bets on both sides - the line has nothing to do with the quality of the teams.
Do yourself a favor - don't bet on sports...
Um, wrong.
It's a "no play" actually, as the line is a sucker line.
It's juuust low enought to get you to lay your cash on Bama, and jusssst high enough that anyone who's watched our offense will take La. Monroe and the points...which is EXACTLY what the bookies and casinos want.
IF I were to play it, given Alabama's abysmal record against the spread as a double digit home favorite, the correct play statistically to give me the best odds of winning is to take the Warhawks plus the points.
And any type of gambling, at least that where one hopes to win and not just drop coins in a slot to drink the frww booze, is all about giving yourself as much of an advantage against the house as possible.
Not that I'd ever bet on football, mind you :biggrin2:, but if I did, I'd win more than I lose for that very reason.
4Da
Last edited:
What?? The line has everything to do with the quality of the teams. I agree with you that there are no locks, but the lines are set (as you point out) at a level that will even out the bets on both sides. Most folks who gamble on sports pay close attention to the quality of the teams, and thus the lines are a good gauge of that -- or at least a good gauge of the perceived quality of the teams.
No, it isn't.
At all.
Obviously, Ohio State was much better than the -2 they were giving at Texas. Obviously, Notre Dame was better than the -7 they were laying at Penn State. Obviously, Vandy was WAY better than the +17 they were given at Alabama. (Or we were way worse than the -17 we were laying...you get the point) Is any of this true? Nope. No way to say.
It's exactly what he said it is: It is simply the number that Vegas thinks will get even money put on both teams, which is why it moves.
Do you really think if Bama's line shoots up to + 26 or 27 over La. Monroethat means we are suddenly in the eyes of Vegas two more points better? No, it means they are gonna lose their asses if Bama covers because they didn't set their number high enough to start with.
I had more than a few drinks one evening with one of the handicappers for one of the casinos in Vegas, and I assure you, the line has nothing to do with the quality, percieved or otherwise, of the two teams...the number is all about the money.
Period.
4Da
I set lines for a few years, and I was very good at it. When I set the lines, I did so with only one goal in mind - getting even money on both sides.
Why is that important? Bacause some teams have huge followings. Those teams always have more money bet on them, regardless of their current talent level. Alabama is one of those teams. In order to get even money on Bama games, you have to set the line high enough to attract betters for the opponent. Only when two strong programs face one another does the person setting the line use talent to set the line. And those are games that you should avoid. If they are a crap-shoot for the bookies, they are also a crap-shoot for the person placing the bet.
If you must bet, bet on the team that you think will win. If the line is too high for you to bet on the team that you think will win a game, don't bet it. The team that wins covers the spread more than 65% of the time. In essence, if you stay away from high lines and only bet on teams that you think will win outright, you have a chance. When you start using the line to make your bet, you are playing with fire. Forget the line. It is there to hurt you, not help you.
If there is anyone qualified to bet on sports, it is me - and I don't. That should tell you something...
I'm from Monroe and know quite a few folks associated with the ULM program. Yes, this program has seen better days and is the subject of alot of harsh jokes and negative criticism, but the present coaching staff is doing a pretty decent job in making the program more competitive and successful. I think the Kansas game was a testament to that.
From what I have heard, ULM's new QB, Kimson Lancaster, would take a few folks by surprise this year because he is so talented and hardly ever saw any PT backing up school passing leader, Stephen Jyles. He is a dual threat QB that can run or pass, which is now proven since he torched a pretty decent Kansas Secondary for 377 yards. He's protected by a really good O-Line for Sunbelt standards. They might give up a sack or 2 but look for them to provide decent protection for them to fire at will against Bama's Secondary. Their running game should not be a threat against us.
On Defense, we might have problems with their Secondary. They are loaded here and have 2 guys that could be playing in the SEC in Kevin Payne and Chaz Williams. Other than that, they are pretty marginal at LB and DL, so I see us finally getting out of our running game rut.
As for Bama covering, I highly doubt it unless we pile up yards on the ground and that's something we haven't done yet this year. If we can't run, I doubt we are going to do alot in the air against their Secondary. ULM is not going to roll over. They have played in just about every SEC West Stadium so there isn't going to be an intimidation factor coming to Bryant Denny. If I was betting, I would take ULM and the points.
From what I have heard, ULM's new QB, Kimson Lancaster, would take a few folks by surprise this year because he is so talented and hardly ever saw any PT backing up school passing leader, Stephen Jyles. He is a dual threat QB that can run or pass, which is now proven since he torched a pretty decent Kansas Secondary for 377 yards. He's protected by a really good O-Line for Sunbelt standards. They might give up a sack or 2 but look for them to provide decent protection for them to fire at will against Bama's Secondary. Their running game should not be a threat against us.
On Defense, we might have problems with their Secondary. They are loaded here and have 2 guys that could be playing in the SEC in Kevin Payne and Chaz Williams. Other than that, they are pretty marginal at LB and DL, so I see us finally getting out of our running game rut.
As for Bama covering, I highly doubt it unless we pile up yards on the ground and that's something we haven't done yet this year. If we can't run, I doubt we are going to do alot in the air against their Secondary. ULM is not going to roll over. They have played in just about every SEC West Stadium so there isn't going to be an intimidation factor coming to Bryant Denny. If I was betting, I would take ULM and the points.
I would tend to go Florida, LSU, and not even dream of touching Ark-Vandy. I would be inclined to go Monroe and the points, but I would not touch that either.
If you bet against Alabama every game last year and the first two of this season, you would be very rich. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Bama only covered twice last year (Florida & South Carolina) with a push against UT.
No matter how much I liked the line, I could never ever bet against Alabama though.
If you bet against Alabama every game last year and the first two of this season, you would be very rich. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Bama only covered twice last year (Florida & South Carolina) with a push against UT.
No matter how much I liked the line, I could never ever bet against Alabama though.
I would disagree with that. There are locks, but they they don't necessarily come along every week. You have to look for them though. Most of the time, they are in the under/overs rather than the point spread. For example, the Louisville-Kentucky game this year had the over-under as 59 points. Meanwhile, Louisville has averaged 59 points at home over the past 2 years by themselves. Kentucky has a pretty crappy defense and had no chance of stopping the Cardinals offense. Meanwhile, Kentucky's offense played well towards the end of the season. Needless to say, I am slightly richer because of that one.
Trending content
Latest threads
-
-
ESPN: Judge grants Oklahoma LB Heinecke extra year- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: NCAA recommends earlier start to football season
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Duke, Diaz reach contract extension through '32
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: WR Knox found negligent in crash, to pay $2.8M
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Report: Ex-Bama DE used Penix, others for fraud
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0