If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Saturday Down South)   We're 83 days away from college football, but here's 250 betting lines for your perusal: 11/30, Northwestern at Illinois (+13)? You freaking kidding me? Northwestern is terrible on the road   (saturdaydownsouth.com) divider line 49
    More: Fail, Illinois, college football, on the road, days away, point spread, Baylor School, Golden Nugget, South Carolina Gamecocks  
•       •       •

745 clicks; posted to Sports » on 07 Jun 2013 at 12:37 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



49 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-06-07 12:53:34 PM
Whose the favorite to win the Stagg Bowl?
 
2013-06-07 12:54:16 PM
Football doesn't start until November 1 (after the World Series).
 
2013-06-07 12:59:26 PM

Incredulous: Football doesn't start until November 1 (after the World Series).


Baseball wastes the good part of its season when there's real sports to pay attention to.

/and I say that as the curator of a baseball museum
//MLB NEEDS to shorten their season and wrap the playoffs up by Labor Day.
 
2013-06-07 01:03:00 PM

UNC_Samurai: Incredulous: Football doesn't start until November 1 (after the World Series).

Baseball wastes the good part of its season when there's real sports to pay attention to.

/and I say that as the curator of a baseball museum
//MLB NEEDS to shorten their season and wrap the playoffs up by Labor Day.


Late September to early October at the latest. Cut it back to 152 games and add some doubleheaders
 
2013-06-07 01:04:20 PM

UNC_Samurai: MLB NEEDS to shorten their season and wrap the playoffs up by Labor Day.


The 162-game season is lengthy, but it's pretty successful at genuinely producing the best in baseball at the end.  Nonetheless, I'd be delighted to see a total elimination of inter-league play.  It's grossly immoral.  Neither league should have any say whatsoever in who wins  the other league's pennant.
 
2013-06-07 01:04:27 PM
Illinois is terrible at football. Take northwestern.
 
2013-06-07 01:06:56 PM
Colorado State at Alabama (-41)

I'm guessing this is a compelling match-up in much the same way as Christians at Lions (64 AD).
 
2013-06-07 01:19:07 PM
South Florida at Michigan State (-16)

Ouch.  Gonna be a rough day for me.
 
2013-06-07 01:21:02 PM
having degrees from both illinois and northwestern, i'm fully qualified to say this:  Seriously... THAT'S THE GAME YOU'RE INTERESTED IN?
 
2013-06-07 01:35:14 PM

BKITU: Colorado State at Alabama (-41)

I'm guessing this is a compelling match-up in much the same way as Christians at Lions (64 AD).


Meh.  CSU HC won two BCS titles as Bama's OC.  First time facing his old team.  Might be something there.
 
2013-06-07 01:38:45 PM
Faber will win it all.
 
2013-06-07 01:44:52 PM

Crewmannumber6: Whose the favorite to win the Stagg Bowl?


Haven't heard of any great recruiting coups for QB or RB by UW-Whitewater, so I'd have to say Mt. Union.
 
2013-06-07 01:45:57 PM
Oklahoma/ Texas is a pick 'em? I'll pick Oklahoma thanks
 
2013-06-07 01:47:34 PM
So the only times I get to see Purdue this year are when they're getting blown out.  Fark that.  I'm making my first sports bet ever this year.

Notre Dame (-14) at Purdue

Last year ND needed a field goal to beat Purdue at home.  I'm taking Purdue.  Yes, I know they suck.
 
2013-06-07 02:07:39 PM

uncleacid: Faber will win it all.


Go College!
i583.photobucket.com
 
2013-06-07 02:33:07 PM

HaywoodJablonski: Oklahoma/ Texas is a pick 'em? I'll pick Oklahoma thanks


Oklahoma lost a ton of guys to graduation while Texas only lost a couple. That said, if Texas doesn't figure out a way to stop Blake Bell it's going to be a arse whooping for the Longhorns.
 
2013-06-07 02:42:07 PM
Northwestern (-10.5) at California

That's it.  I'm withdrawing my 401(k) and taking Cal.  Also:

Oregon (-37) at Colorado
California at Oregon (-34)
Washington State at Oregon (-35.5)
Utah at Oregon (-28.5)

When was the last time you saw spreads like these for Div I-A conference games?
 
2013-06-07 02:45:44 PM

caddisfly: When was the last time you saw spreads like these for Div I-A conference games?


1993, the last year I was in the SDSU marching band, but she and I broke up a year later.
 
2013-06-07 02:48:31 PM

Lattices aren't Distributive: Crewmannumber6: Whose the favorite to win the Stagg Bowl?

Haven't heard of any great recruiting coups for QB or RB by UW-Whitewater, so I'd have to say Mt. Union.


My son is a freshman guard at Thomas More next year so, maybe them?
 
2013-06-07 02:59:04 PM

iamskibibitz: HaywoodJablonski: Oklahoma/ Texas is a pick 'em? I'll pick Oklahoma thanks

Oklahoma lost a ton of guys to graduation while Texas only lost a couple. That said, if Texas doesn't figure out a way to stop Blake Bell it's going to be a arse whooping for the Longhorns.


Yeah but Texas was not good at all last year? Who's their quarterback? Mack seems to have lost his way the past couple of years. I'll take a down Oklahoma team against this mess I think
 
2013-06-07 03:11:34 PM
Illinois is terrible, no qualifiers. At least basketball seems to perhaps have upward momentum over next few years with Groce, but the football hire was a disaster so far. Northwestern wins easily.

/Will still be out there wearing orange, pouring our flasks into sodas
 
2013-06-07 03:28:28 PM

caddisfly: Northwestern (-10.5) at California

That's it.  I'm withdrawing my 401(k) and taking Cal.  Also:

Oregon (-37) at Colorado
California at Oregon (-34)
Washington State at Oregon (-35.5)
Utah at Oregon (-28.5)

When was the last time you saw spreads like these for Div I-A conference games?


Utah and Cal? Yeah, that's a little high of a spread. Colorado and WSU though... Yeah, I dunno, I'd still take Oregon there.
 
2013-06-07 03:41:38 PM

Lamadin: caddisfly: Northwestern (-10.5) at California

That's it.  I'm withdrawing my 401(k) and taking Cal.  Also:

Oregon (-37) at Colorado
California at Oregon (-34)
Washington State at Oregon (-35.5)
Utah at Oregon (-28.5)

When was the last time you saw spreads like these for Div I-A conference games?

Utah and Cal? Yeah, that's a little high of a spread. Colorado and WSU though... Yeah, I dunno, I'd still take Oregon there.


I'd love to see the Oregon-UVA spread.
 
2013-06-07 03:43:12 PM

caddisfly: Northwestern (-10.5) at California

That's it.  I'm withdrawing my 401(k) and taking Cal.  Also:

Oregon (-37) at Colorado
California at Oregon (-34)
Washington State at Oregon (-35.5)
Utah at Oregon (-28.5)

When was the last time you saw spreads like these for Div I-A conference games?


I seem to recall a 41-point spread for a Stanford-USC game a few years back... can't quite recall how it turned out, though.

/ That's a lie; I remember it vividly
// Enjoying historically bizarre era of Cardinal dominance
/// Not looking forward to our inevitable harsh comeuppance
 
2013-06-07 03:47:34 PM

ducklord666: caddisfly: Northwestern (-10.5) at California

That's it.  I'm withdrawing my 401(k) and taking Cal.  Also:

Oregon (-37) at Colorado
California at Oregon (-34)
Washington State at Oregon (-35.5)
Utah at Oregon (-28.5)

When was the last time you saw spreads like these for Div I-A conference games?

I seem to recall a 41-point spread for a Stanford-USC game a few years back... can't quite recall how it turned out, though.

/ That's a lie; I remember it vividly
// Enjoying historically bizarre era of Cardinal dominance
/// Not looking forward to our inevitable harsh comeuppance


UC Davis.


/Just gotta rub that one in
//Better than App St-Michigan IMO
 
2013-06-07 03:53:38 PM

BKITU: Colorado State at Alabama (-41)


Lamadin: Oregon (-37) at Colorado
California at Oregon (-34)
Washington State at Oregon (-35.5)
Utah at Oregon (-28.5)

Kansas at Texas (-31.5)
Alabama (-30) at Kentucky
Arkansas at Alabama (-29)
Kansas at Oklahoma State (-29)


take the underdogs.  Once the realities of the season kick in, people will find these teams are much more evenly matched than originally predicted.

Auburn at Texas A&M (-24)

whoa.  Is Auburn that bad?
 
2013-06-07 03:56:30 PM

Lifeless: ducklord666: caddisfly: Northwestern (-10.5) at California

That's it.  I'm withdrawing my 401(k) and taking Cal.  Also:

Oregon (-37) at Colorado
California at Oregon (-34)
Washington State at Oregon (-35.5)
Utah at Oregon (-28.5)

When was the last time you saw spreads like these for Div I-A conference games?

I seem to recall a 41-point spread for a Stanford-USC game a few years back... can't quite recall how it turned out, though.

/ That's a lie; I remember it vividly
// Enjoying historically bizarre era of Cardinal dominance
/// Not looking forward to our inevitable harsh comeuppance

UC Davis.


/Just gotta rub that one in
//Better than App St-Michigan IMO


See, that's EXACTLY the kind of game Cardinal alums from the fallow years are USED to dropping.  Hell, we used to choke up our guts to San Jose State on a regular basis.  But now we're some sort of perennial football powerhouse?  That's just plain dogs-and-platypi-living together wrong.  When the cosmic axis shifts, it will NOT be pretty.

/ If history is any indication it'll probably be to a 2-and-8 Kal team with a drunk coach and a backup QB.
 
2013-06-07 04:05:09 PM
SlothB77:

Auburn at Texas A&M (-24)

whoa.  Is Auburn that bad?


They did not win a single SEC game last year.  They have no QB, LB, DL or Wide Receivers.  They have a decent center and decent RBs.  They will be battling Kentucky for worst team in the SEC this year
 
2013-06-07 04:24:58 PM
Subby doesn't understand how sports books work.

There are initial lines, yes... but once bets start entering the system, the lines/odds are adjusted  based on the incoming bets. The house picks no "favorite" because the idea is to keep the "vig" as constant as possible, giving the house a particular percentage return.

The house never loses on line bets.
 
2013-06-07 04:41:22 PM

LesserEvil: Subby doesn't understand how sports books work.

There are initial lines, yes... but once bets start entering the system, the lines/odds are adjusted  based on the incoming bets. The house picks no "favorite" because the idea is to keep the "vig" as constant as possible, giving the house a particular percentage return.

The house never loses on line bets.


He thinks the line is low.  Why does that mean he/she does not understand how sports books work? and yes the house does pick a favorite you mean they just have no interest in whether the favorite or underdog wins the bet

/not subby
 
2013-06-07 04:44:23 PM

Hang On Voltaire: LesserEvil: Subby doesn't understand how sports books work.

There are initial lines, yes... but once bets start entering the system, the lines/odds are adjusted  based on the incoming bets. The house picks no "favorite" because the idea is to keep the "vig" as constant as possible, giving the house a particular percentage return.

The house never loses on line bets.

He thinks the line is low.  Why does that mean he/she does not understand how sports books work? and yes the house does pick a favorite you mean they just have no interest in whether the favorite or underdog wins the bet

/not subby


The current bets determine the line. All this means is that somebody is making wild bets, and not enough money has come in to balance it out.
 
2013-06-07 04:48:53 PM
LesserEvil:

The current bets determine the line. All this means is that somebody is making wild bets, and not enough money has come in to balance it out.

or right now that is what the oddsmaker thinks will draw even money on both sides.  Again, the subby just thinks that is a low line.
 
2013-06-07 05:01:55 PM

ducklord666: Lifeless: ducklord666: caddisfly: Northwestern (-10.5) at California

That's it.  I'm withdrawing my 401(k) and taking Cal.  Also:

Oregon (-37) at Colorado
California at Oregon (-34)
Washington State at Oregon (-35.5)
Utah at Oregon (-28.5)

When was the last time you saw spreads like these for Div I-A conference games?

I seem to recall a 41-point spread for a Stanford-USC game a few years back... can't quite recall how it turned out, though.

/ That's a lie; I remember it vividly
// Enjoying historically bizarre era of Cardinal dominance
/// Not looking forward to our inevitable harsh comeuppance

UC Davis.


/Just gotta rub that one in
//Better than App St-Michigan IMO

See, that's EXACTLY the kind of game Cardinal alums from the fallow years are USED to dropping.  Hell, we used to choke up our guts to San Jose State on a regular basis.  But now we're some sort of perennial football powerhouse?  That's just plain dogs-and-platypi-living together wrong.  When the cosmic axis shifts, it will NOT be pretty.

/ If history is any indication it'll probably be to a 2-and-8 Kal team with a drunk coach and a backup QB.


It's a combination of an administration that realizes the potential of publicity and alumni money that a good team brings in, and a department that uses the school's national footprint as a recruiting advantage.
 
2013-06-07 05:03:07 PM

French Rage: ducklord666: Lifeless: ducklord666: caddisfly: Northwestern (-10.5) at California

That's it.  I'm withdrawing my 401(k) and taking Cal.  Also:

Oregon (-37) at Colorado
California at Oregon (-34)
Washington State at Oregon (-35.5)
Utah at Oregon (-28.5)

When was the last time you saw spreads like these for Div I-A conference games?

I seem to recall a 41-point spread for a Stanford-USC game a few years back... can't quite recall how it turned out, though.

/ That's a lie; I remember it vividly
// Enjoying historically bizarre era of Cardinal dominance
/// Not looking forward to our inevitable harsh comeuppance

UC Davis.


/Just gotta rub that one in
//Better than App St-Michigan IMO

See, that's EXACTLY the kind of game Cardinal alums from the fallow years are USED to dropping.  Hell, we used to choke up our guts to San Jose State on a regular basis.  But now we're some sort of perennial football powerhouse?  That's just plain dogs-and-platypi-living together wrong.  When the cosmic axis shifts, it will NOT be pretty.

/ If history is any indication it'll probably be to a 2-and-8 Kal team with a drunk coach and a backup QB.

It's a combination of an administration that realizes the potential of publicity and alumni money that a good team brings in, and a department that uses the school's national footprint as a recruiting advantage.


It also helps that Walt Harris will never be allowed near a I-A team again.
 
2013-06-07 05:23:54 PM

Lattices aren't Distributive: Crewmannumber6: Whose the favorite to win the Stagg Bowl?

Haven't heard of any great recruiting coups for QB or RB by UW-Whitewater, so I'd have to say Mt. Union.


Larry stepped down though, I wonder how much that is going to impact the team.  Lots of pressure on the son now.
 
2013-06-07 06:33:29 PM

ducklord666: Lifeless: ducklord666: caddisfly: Northwestern (-10.5) at California

That's it.  I'm withdrawing my 401(k) and taking Cal.  Also:

Oregon (-37) at Colorado
California at Oregon (-34)
Washington State at Oregon (-35.5)
Utah at Oregon (-28.5)

When was the last time you saw spreads like these for Div I-A conference games?

I seem to recall a 41-point spread for a Stanford-USC game a few years back... can't quite recall how it turned out, though.

/ That's a lie; I remember it vividly
// Enjoying historically bizarre era of Cardinal dominance
/// Not looking forward to our inevitable harsh comeuppance

UC Davis.


/Just gotta rub that one in
//Better than App St-Michigan IMO

See, that's EXACTLY the kind of game Cardinal alums from the fallow years are USED to dropping.  Hell, we used to choke up our guts to San Jose State on a regular basis.  But now we're some sort of perennial football powerhouse?  That's just plain dogs-and-platypi-living together wrong.  When the cosmic axis shifts, it will NOT be pretty.

/ If history is any indication it'll probably be to a 2-and-8 Kal team with a drunk coach and a backup QB.


Tell me about it. We choked to the Cardinal last year.
 
2013-06-07 06:44:33 PM

caddisfly: We choked to the Cardinal last year.


That's what you get for fielding a team of of altar boys.
 
2013-06-07 07:08:38 PM

BKITU: caddisfly: We choked to the Cardinal last year.

That's what you get for fielding a team of of altar boys.


Hi, I'm the Athletic Director of Penn State.  We're interested in scheduling a series of home games.
 
2013-06-07 07:19:32 PM

Lattices aren't Distributive: Crewmannumber6: Whose the favorite to win the Stagg Bowl?

Haven't heard of any great recruiting coups for QB or RB by UW-Whitewater, so I'd have to say Mt. Union.


As a Whitewater Alum this makes me sad.

I work at University of Illinois so I'm getting a kick!
 
2013-06-07 07:40:57 PM

caddisfly: Northwestern (-10.5) at California

That's it.  I'm withdrawing my 401(k) and taking Cal.  Also:

Oregon (-37) at Colorado
California at Oregon (-34)
Washington State at Oregon (-35.5)
Utah at Oregon (-28.5)

When was the last time you saw spreads like these for Div I-A conference games?


I noticed that it looks like the Ducks would go undefeated if the lines are all correct.

I expected them to be good again, but didn't think Vegas would be so high on them without Chip.
 
2013-06-07 08:14:32 PM

Hang On Voltaire: SlothB77:

Auburn at Texas A&M (-24)

whoa.  Is Auburn that bad?

They did not win a single SEC game last year.  They have no QB, LB, DL or Wide Receivers.  They have a decent center and decent RBs.  They will be battling Kentucky for worst team in the SEC this year


Voltaire, you give us too much credit. I present to you my very own Worley led Vols as another contender for the BCDS (Bowl Cellar Dweller Series) Championship contender out of the SEC. We lost way too much and have replaced it with way too little. Even looking beyond the offensive players (QB, WR, WR, WR, TE, OL, and maybe another OL) who graduated or went pro, we have serious issues on defense which we haven't really addressed. I wish I could say that our secondary cannot possibly get worse, but they're on their third DC in as many years. Not only that, but our best secondary player (for his position and expectations) is former walkon running back Jaron Toney who spent time at nickel and dime last season.

Despite my absolute negaVol opinion of our prospects, I've heard some good things about the two new receivers we picked up and the freshmen DBs might hold their own. All things considered, a 6-6 record is not exactly a lofty goal for this team (3 Sisters of the Blind, Deaf, & Dumb and pick 3 of Auburn, Vandy, Kentucky, Mizzou). I will be appropriately shocked if we beat any of our other 5 opponents. My brother and I got to watch the Kentucky game in person. We were both impressed by the O line. With most of those guys coming back we should be able to continue running the ball against weaker front 7s which will take the pressure off Worley to perform. I just hope we don't get into any shootouts. This is not Heat, and we are not Pacino.

/Big Orange Country!
 
2013-06-07 09:03:17 PM

bacongood: northwestern


That and Pat Fitzgerald has turned Northwestern into a damn fine team. They scare me going forward. Becuase it's his dream job so he's not leaving
 
2013-06-07 09:38:21 PM
College ball? That's the pro ball that's inferior to the NFL, right? For the kind of payrolls they have, especially in the SEC, you'd think the games would be better.

/The NFL can't start again soon enough
 
2013-06-07 09:50:21 PM
Notre (who da' QB?) Dame is favorite in every game except pick-em Michigan and last game Stanford?

Time to cash in the penny jar.
 
2013-06-07 11:14:13 PM

caddisfly: Northwestern (-10.5) at California

That's it.  I'm withdrawing my 401(k) and taking Cal.  Also:

Oregon (-37) at Colorado
California at Oregon (-34)
Washington State at Oregon (-35.5)
Utah at Oregon (-28.5)

When was the last time you saw spreads like these for Div I-A conference games?


What was the last time Alabama played Kentucky or Vanderbilt?
 
2013-06-08 12:34:42 AM

LesserEvil: Hang On Voltaire: LesserEvil: Subby doesn't understand how sports books work.

There are initial lines, yes... but once bets start entering the system, the lines/odds are adjusted  based on the incoming bets. The house picks no "favorite" because the idea is to keep the "vig" as constant as possible, giving the house a particular percentage return.

The house never loses on line bets.

He thinks the line is low.  Why does that mean he/she does not understand how sports books work? and yes the house does pick a favorite you mean they just have no interest in whether the favorite or underdog wins the bet

/not subby

The current bets determine the line. All this means is that somebody is making wild bets, and not enough money has come in to balance it out.


There are no "Current bets"  this is simply the opening line. the books try to set the opening line at an even balance, planning on equal action on both sides.  A lot of times they will cheat a few points anticipating heavy action on darling favorites like ND, USC, OSU or Dallas/NE if you bet pro.  A sharp bettor can analyze these trends and completely pick them apart to their advantage.
 
2013-06-08 04:52:17 AM

Electromax: Illinois is terrible, no qualifiers. At least basketball seems to perhaps have upward momentum over next few years with Groce, but the football hire was a disaster so far. Northwestern wins easily.

/Will still be out there wearing orange, pouring our flasks into sodas


Groce, that farker.

/met the new coach, nice guy, OSU finally agreed to play Ohio this year....now that DJ Cooper (and a few others) are gone.
 
das
2013-06-08 08:06:09 AM

Lattices aren't Distributive: Crewmannumber6: Whose the favorite to win the Stagg Bowl?

Haven't heard of any great recruiting coups for QB or RB by UW-Whitewater, so I'd have to say Mt. Union.


Mt. has a new coach this year.....I think, so........
 
2013-06-08 08:08:12 AM

BKITU: Colorado State at Alabama (-41)

I'm guessing this is a compelling match-up in much the same way as Christians at Lions (64 AD).


That was not a home game for the Lions by any stretch of the imagination--they were playing 1,000 miles from home, for pete's sake. True, they had the crowd on their side, but I'd still call it a neutral field.
 
Displayed 49 of 49 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report