• 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!

Wake +3 O/U 51

I would love 47 too. I don't think there's too big a threat of this being over 43 or 44.
 
I will note that Army played a 47-39 game against Buffalo earlier this year -- though Buffalo is next-to-last in scoring D in the country, and Army did almost hold Stanford to 7 first-half points on Saturday
 
The professional betting public seems to think Vegas is overvaluing Wake. Isn't this the third straight game where our line has moved at least 4 points against us.
 
Don't get it. Wake should win due to their defense.
 
A lot of the big-time bettors base there analysis on yards per point. A low yards per point on offense (typically the result of defensive scores or short drives after turnovers) means that actual game score does not reflect how the team performed. Out of 128 teams, WF is #3 in yards per point (9.6), which means to some that WF's offensive point totals are deceiving in that the offense played worse than the point total. Would guess that this is driving the "smart" action against WF.

I don't like the game as I am concerned about the staff's familiarity with stopping an option attack.

I get that WF is not a talented team right now, but no one can rationally claim that Army has more talent than WF. There is not a single player on Army that WF offered. They are smaller and slower than WF. This game is all about preparation.
 
Know it's not a completely identical offense, but BG did beat Ohio and Solich 49-0 last year
 
Cumberland and I went back 5 years and saw no triple option teams vs Clawson right off the bat
 
Pilchard said:
A lot of the big-time bettors base there analysis on yards per point. A low yards per point on offense (typically the result of defensive scores or short drives after turnovers) means that actual game score does not reflect how the team performed. Out of 128 teams, WF is #3 in yards per point (9.6), which means to some that WF's offensive point totals are deceiving in that the offense played worse than the point total. Would guess that this is driving the "smart" action against WF.

I don't like the game as I am concerned about the staff's familiarity with stopping an option attack.

I get that WF is not a talented team right now, but no one can rationally claim that Army has more talent than WF. There is not a single player on Army that WF offered. They are smaller and slower than WF. This game is all about preparation.
Click to expand...

Someone tried to last year. I don't remember who but it's linked above on this thread somewhere.
 
I love the under here and if I had to bet I would take Wake straight up. I think this is something like 21-17 wake or 23-20
 
Anyone else think this was the line on the Louisville game and wonder wtf?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top