• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

NC State -8

StrickDeac said:
St. Pete - yes. Stadium is crappy, but the location is great.

Annapolis (stay in DC) is fine. Cold, but still worth going.

Birmingham, Detroit, Shreveport, I'd probably pass on.

El Paso's stadium is gorgeous, the city stinks. Playing a Pac-12 team.

Everything else is a go.
Click to expand...

You'd pass on Detroit? I'm shocked! SHOCKED, I tell you ...
 
Notre Dame isn't going to be in the Sun Bowl if they can't get to 6 wins. And they're 1-3 with games against Stanford, Miami and USC left.
 
Football Study Hall has us with a 49% chance of finishing better than .500 the rest of the way to get 8 or more wins.
 
PhDeac said:
Football Study Hall has us with a 49% chance of finishing better than .500 the rest of the way to get 8 or more wins.
Click to expand...

Just feels a bit optimistic. We have 0% chance w Louisville and Clemson and maybe 5% w FSU. So they're basically saying its 50/50 we go 4-1 against the rest?
 
I'm surprised at the ~ 15-20% chance for both Clemson and FSU. I guess I'm lowf
 
Henry Chinaski said:
I'm surprised at the ~ 15-20% chance for both Clemson and FSU. I guess I'm lowf
Click to expand...

I don't expect us to beat either Clemson or FSU. However, FSU hasn't exactly been hitting on all cylinders. They are a very beatable team. We'd need Hinton back and for him to run for about 200 yards. But, hey, stranger things have happened. :)

Deacs just need to take care of business against the teams they can beat and Moo-U is certainly a winnable game. Then Syracuse, Army and BC and we have 8 wins.

My concern is more injuries with Clemson, Louisville and FSU remaining. We just have to find a way to stay healthy and get Carney and Hinton back in the lineup.
 
I concur. I didn't expect to beat Duke or Indiana on the road. But we did. I didn't expect to beat FSU 3 times in a row '06 to '08. But we did. I wouldn't predict it, but a confident Wake team has pulled strong upsets before. Heck, FSU had to hold us off and weather a late scoring threat against last year's weak team. Probably a loss, but every time we've beaten these teams it's been an upset.
 
Team Rankings has us with the following win percentages:

Opponent Win Odds
Louisville 1.1%
Florida St 7.3%
Clemson 11.2%
NC State 32.9%
 
Feels good to read arguments about Wake's chances of going 5 and 0.
Its been a while.
 
I can't figure out (or find anywhere) how offensive percentile is determined or if it's relative to just your own team or everyone, but our percentile ranking against Indiana with Wolford as QB was the highest of the year.
 
I see Wake is putting together an alumni tailgate on Saturday. I will likely be taking advantage of the $15 parking there.
 
deaconbd said:
wsc8521s in an alternate universe ... where the sharps set lines based on projected outcome ...

wsc thinks those big buildings are built based on their ability to project the outcome of the game rather than their ability to get between 50 and 52.38% of the money to each side ...

but don't try to educate him ... he'll just say to go away ...

don't try to convince him that the sharpies don't pick the games instead they pick a line to get action ... he just says go away ...
Click to expand...

Sportsbooks don't set the line to split the action. There is a great book called "The Odds" by Thad Millman who spent a football season with the lines makers at the Stardust in Vegas and describes how lines are set and why they move.

As detailed in the book, its common for an inordinate amount of public money to be on one side of the game, without a line move or a move in the opposite direction. If the theory was true that Vegas just wants 50/50 split of the money on a game then the line would move to attract money on the side opposite where the bets are being made, but that often doesn't happen. There are number of examples of that this week. (BTW, a successful handicapping technique is to simply look at the lines moves against where the money is, and to bet the opposite side of those games).

Taking one example for this Saturday: Duke hosts UVA this week, the opening line is Duke -4 (which is a key number because so many games fall in the 3 to 4 point range). 65% of the action on the game is on Duke; yet the line has dropped to Duke -3.5. Why? Because even though a majority of the money is on Duke, the sharps (professional bettors like Billy Walters) like UVA. So, the Sportsbooks are willing to take a position on the game and attract even more money on Duke because experience tells them that the sharps side covers more often than the public side, and the Sports books can make even more money if 65% of the action is on the losing side as opposed to 50%. Another example of that was the WF at Duke game a couple of weeks ago. The public was all over Duke (as was many on this board) yet the line dropped because the smart money was on WF. WF covered and the books made killing.

Those that run the Sportsbooks are gamblers too; they will take positions on games; it further helps them that the vig is on their side. The concept that Sportsbooks look to split the action is wrong. Sportsbooks are in the business to maximize the money that they make, and to do that they will gladly take more than 50% of the action on what the bookie considers the wrong side.
 
Last edited:
Pilchard said:
Sportsbooks don't set the line to split the action. There is a great book called "The Odds" by Thad Millman who spent a football season with the lines makers at the Stardust in Vegas and describes how lines are set and why they move.

As detailed in the book, its common for an inordinate amount of public money to be on one side of the game, without a line move or a move in the opposite direction. If the theory was true that Vegas just wants 50/50 split of the money on a game then the line would move to attract money on the side opposite where the bets are being made, but that often doesn't happen. There are number of examples of that this week. (BTW, a successful handicapping technique is to simply look at the lines moves against where the money is, and to bet the opposite side of those games).

Taking one example for this Saturday: Duke hosts UVA this week, the opening line is Duke -4 (which is a key number because so many games fall in the 3 to 4 point range). 65% of the action on the game is on Duke; yet the line has dropped to Duke -3.5. Why? Because even though a majority of the money is on Duke, the sharps (professional bettors like Billy Walters) like UVA. So, the Sportsbooks are willing to take a position on the game and attract even more money on Duke because experience tells them that the sharps side covers more often than the public side, and the Sports books can make even more money if 65% of the action is on the losing side as opposed to 50%. Another example of that was the WF at Duke game a couple of weeks ago. The public was all over Duke (as was many on this board) yet the line dropped because the smart money was on WF. WF covered and the books made killing.

Those that run the Sportsbooks are gamblers too; they will take positions on games; it further helps them that the vig is on their side. The concept that Sportsbooks look to split the action is wrong. Sportsbooks are in the business to maximize the money that they make, and to do that they will gladly take more than 50% of the action on what the bookie considers the wrong side.
Click to expand...

Same was true for Wake last week, last I saw 58% of bets on IU and 63% of money on Deacs.
 
So which side is the public money on in the Wake-State game?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top