Can we finally talk College Football Futures?
Slow Friday in the office and I have a few hours still to procrastinate. What better way to do that then looking at College Football futures. After all, it may be a relatively turbulent summer for college football fans – that doesn’t mean we can’t collectively make money. So, what’s on your radar?
Some teams of interest, as of Friday on Draftkings (Regular season O/U win totals):
- Neb – 7.5
- Northwestern – 4
- Illinois – 4.5
- FSU – 6.5
- ND – 8.5
- Wisc – 8.5
- Texas – 8
- GA – 10.5
- Clemson – 10.5
- TAMU – 8.5
- Bama – 10.5
- OK – 9.5
- OSU – 10.5
- M – 9.5
- PSU – 8.5
- Purdue – 7.5
- Minn – 7.5
- MSU – 7.5
- IU – 4
- Rutgers – 4
- MD – 6
- IOWA – 7.5
- FLA – 7
- LSU – 7
NCAA Championship:
- Bama +180
- OSU +320
- GA +380
- Clemson +1000
- M +4000
- ND +4500
On my radar – liking the ND Under 8.5. Seems like the public is betting that number up, but I have a hard time seeing a new coach with no experience able to hit the ground running. I think they’re in for a step back.
MSU – what are we thinking? I know we WANT them to take a step back, given they were one of the luckiest teams in football last year. But, even with a step back I think they still get to 8 wins – and I would feel gross betting the over.
NW – Taking the Over all day. They’re in for one of their classic bounce back years.
Illinois – I believe in Burt, I guess. I see them as a 6 win team. Taking that over.
I was hoping Nebraska would be a little less than 7.5. They were very unlucky last year, but that number seems too high for me to get involved one way or the other.
IU – what’s the deal with them? Was the Covid year a blip? I think I like the Over on that one.
Any thing else striking the board’s fancy?
I agree with your takes but I would take the under for Nebraska because as unlucky as they were, they seem disorganized as hell and the only good thing about them transferred out.
I would also add that I see Oklahoma getting to 10 on pure talent alone so i would go over. Additionally, i think that i would bet the over for Iowa because they always seem to be a steady 8-5 team with some 10+ win years. And the West sucks.
I was hoping Nebraska would be a little less than 7.5. They were very unlucky last year, but that number seems too high for me to get involved one way or the other.
I was thinking the same thing (i.e, unlucky last year) but I'm just not sure. It looks like they added a number of people through the portal. But I'm just not sure how motivated the team is to play for Frost anymore. I'll avoid that one like the plague.
Oklahoma at 9.5 is interesting. Moving from an offensive minded coach to a defensive one in an offensive conference. But it looks like they got a good OC. Weak overall Big12 could push them over 9.5.
I would be tempted take the over for Rutgers at 4. I think Schiano might get that team ready to play. Or not. It is Rugters after all. And there aren't too many cupcakes on their schedule.
I'm betting the over on msu, At worst they get it and I win some money, they lose I laugh all off season.
I wanted to talk about climate change...
lmao ... that thread got out of hand fast
What thread was that discussed in? I'm sure it's locked but was curious to read the comments, if it hasn't been deleted.
Relative to THIS thread, I am thinking about taking the under on Mich St. Walker carried that team last season. No Walker, no 8 wins AFAIC.
OP asked if anyone else was worried that outdoor sports wouldn't be tenable in 20-50 years (his kids or grandkids lifetime) due to climate change and what they were doing to prepare, if anything. then mentioned moving to another country to better survive the apparent apocalypse coming (my words not his/hers), which only made sense (to me) once he clarified that.
many people were answering/discussing just fine, then of course some people came in as expected and making it hyper-political.
even non-political comments and questions were getting hyper-political replies, snarky and rude replies, which all shows that once politics comes into play, there is little thought or decorum, and definitely no critical thinking. just angry comments, many totally missing the point (example: two guys talking about whether a supercharged 4-cylinder or a 6-cylinder is better and a third person comes up and just starts being a jerk about fossil fuels, the environment, and electric vehicles. like, come on man, that wasn't even the point of the comment/discussion ... that kinda stuff was going on).
lots of facebook level talking points from both "sides"
it was kinda funny but got shut down AND deleted. lots of mgobloggers were seething at their screens
as if you weren't one of the main culprits...
i didn't type a single political thing in the entire thread and wasn't rude to anyone. all i did was
a) to ask OP to clarify his question because it didn't make sense to me initially. once he clarified i said "thanks, makes sense now"
b) point out that people were doing exactly what i stated above ... dragging politics into a non-political question
in fact, i explicitly asked OP a few questions for clarification and everyone BUT the OP was replying to me answering some of the questions with politics and snark for some unknown reason since i wasn't even talking to them.
it's bonkers you're calling me out when i was one of the few people being apolitical. some people can't help it i guess. they see politics in every conversation. that's gotta suck to go through life like that
Being the OP, I can attest that drjaws wasn’t doing any political maneuvering with me personally in that thread. Unfortunately, I didn’t have the chance to answer most of his questions. I also agree it was completely hi-jacked by political jockeys and XM trying to delegitimize the subject, as some people are entirely too predictable when taking into account their past history on this board.
thanks for backing me up on that since i can't prove it as the thread got nuked.
i was asking you because of my own confusion, which you succinctly clarified, and i said "gotcha thanks. makes sense."
Okay first of all, you commented probably more than anyone in that thread being combative with people. Saying you weren't being rude to people is a joke. Aside from what you replied to me, you told at least 3 other people that they missed the point or dont understand what X means.
Your "main question" was "how does moving countries help global warming?"...which while a tad dismissive, is fine I guess, but you prefaced it by saying " what do you say to someone who says i don't believe in climate change, we had one of the coldest snowy winters on record last year" what do you say? do you argue that, overall, the earth is heating up?" so yeah you did try to inject some slant there. then when I replied you acted like you didn't ask that question....
Then in the thread you also said something like "even if the US went completely off fossil fuels tomorrow, it would barely make a dent in global warming because China, India, and other countries"....which is the complete opposite of your post here about being logical. See, if you really were thinking critically then you would realize that the US uses about 20% of the worlds fossil fuels, and reducing something by 20% is not "barely a dent"....but again you have no time for numbers and logic and instead had to regurgitate talking points you've heard all the while claiming you are some bastion of reason above the fray.
Its fine, have your opinions, but don't come into another thread and act like you were this apolitical voice of reason.
edit just to say not sure what you're talking about. I don't upvote my own posts. Feel free to show some evidence of that. Or whatever, just tell others they are the ones "seething", while you read through my whole posting history ;)
damn dude chill out.
you're taking offense to the questions i was asking someone else. i wasn't even talking to you and you're using it as "evidence" i was being snarky, rude and political. there was no "slant," there was no "dismissiveness." i was simply asking the OP questions because i was confused on his opinion. thats how conversations and discussions work.
in fact the very person i was actually talking to just stated i WASNT being snarky political or rude with him. do you see how messed up that is? you're getting offended for someone else, who wasn't offended.
maybe, just maybe, you interjected yourself into a convo that had nothing to do with you, then got bothered by it, and interpreted everything i typed in a negative light.
and how the fuck is saying "i think you're missing the point" combative? how else do you have a discussion?
the only one being rude here is you.
See, if you really were thinking critically....
but again you have no time for numbers and logic and instead had to regurgitate talking points you've heard all the while claiming you are some bastion of reason above the fray.
i never regurgitated anything. i never typed any of my own views. i never typed any "facts" or linked any "sources." i simply asked questions to someone else.
Its fine, have your opinions, but don't come into another thread ....
i never once stated any of my opinions on the subject. you're drawing any conclusions you think you may have drawn completely on your own.
obviously something i typed struck a nerve in you and now you're making things up. i am done with this conversation. have a good weekend and I hope you relax a little.
also, it doesn't surprise me you'd claim i was one of the culprits when even the OP stated i wasn't ....... you upvote your own comments
what is your over/under on world average temperature for 3022?
I hope technology will improve to make renewable energy sources the primary energy source.in the next 30 to 50 years. Otherwise the green house gases will turn our planet into a Venus like planet.
I'll take Northwestern over 4 wins all day long
Idk you can say the floor is two wins with So IL and Miami, but then they need three more wins. I see two tossups at home against Maryland and Minnesota but the rest of the games look really hard for them.
Northwestern's doing a thing where they alternate terrible seasons with inexplicably great ones. On a first/last/first/last sequence in the Big Ten West. It won't make sense but they win like 9 this year.
jumping on
Michigan - over
NW - over
Iowa - over
OK - over (i think they struggle early but they're playing cupcakes so they'll win even when they struggle)
Love that this has been posted.
I love PSU under even more and have been obsessing about it for 48 hours.
@ Purdue for the season opener, night game. At Auburn, who is a tire fire, but still very capable of beating any Franklin-coached team. Obviously UM, OSU and MSU and whoever else wants to take them to 8 OTs.
I got them at 8 going into that MSU game. Honestly, I think that's the swing game for both PSU/MSU's O/U projections.
I could definitely see that.
If they go 2-0 vs Purdue/Auburn, I’m going to be severely sweating my bet.
Michigan also plays:
Hawaii - 4.5
Colorado State - 5.5
Connecticut - 2.5
That's 7 games against teams not expected to have winning seasons. Three more wins gets us to 10, which makes the over for M.
I prefer days of future passed.
a little moody this Friday?
I'm betting Nebraska to win the west, or at least make a push for winning it. They have a QB set on proving themselves and they finally have a special teams coach.
We shouldn’t talk about College Football futures until we beat Ohio S. . .
Yeah sure whatever let’s talk futures.
Bama with the over on 10.5 makes sense to me. Looking at their schedule I don't see them dropping any games let alone two. I guess @ LSU could be a tough game if Cajun Kelly has the Tigers rolling. I don't see Texas giving Bama problems.
Bama +180 for title but O/U is 10.5
something is off
Going over 10.5 for bama is priced at -255 (under is +205). For some reason, bookmakers max out O/U at 10.5 games, and just adjust the payout.
I'll take:
- Neb – 7.5 under
- Northwestern – 4 push
- Illinois – 4.5 under
- FSU – 6.5 under
- ND – 8.5 over
- Wisc – 8.5 over
- Texas – 8 under
- GA – 10.5 under
- Clemson – 10.5 under
- TAMU – 8.5 over
- Bama – 10.5 over
- OK – 9.5 under
- OSU – 10.5 over
- M – 9.5 under
- PSU – 8.5 over
- Purdue – 7.5 under
- Minn – 7.5 under
- MSU – 7.5 over
- IU – 4 over
- Rutgers – 4 over
- MD – 6 push
- IOWA – 7.5 over
- FLA – 7 push
- LSU – 7 over
negged for taking the under for Michigan with the easiest schedule in a while. cumong man, be a fan. 11-1 going into AN ohio state toilet bowl
We’re playing 13 reg season games this year?
yes, they're gonna let us kick AN ohio states ass twice. present from our very own Santa
Anyone jumping on some NCAA championship futures? It's so telling that there's a top 2-3 and basically no one else. Personally, I think it's Bama but there just doesn't seem to be much EV with +180.
I agree 100%. Not enough EV take a team at +180 vs the field. Even if it’s Bama.
My degenerate gambler self always tends to look at over/unders from a schedule POV:
- Notre Dame under 8.5. Their schedule includes @ Ohio State, vs Clemson and @ USC --- assume they lose all of those (USC game at the end of the year so this gives Lincoln Riley time for them to catch their stride) and they would have to win every other game for this to miss. @ UNC and vs BYU (in Vegas) are both tricky enough that I think the smart play is the under.
- Penn State under 8.5. Penn State starts the season @ Purdue. They are currently favored by 3.5 but that certainly is a loseable game. Lose that and 3 more losses are virtually guaranteed among vs Ohio State, @ Michigan, @ Auburn, @ Indiana, vs MSU and @ Rutgers. James Franklin's teams certainly aren't known for their mental fortitude over the years so a loss in the opener could be especially foreboding. But even with a win over Purdue it's a tough slog for a team that lost 6 last year.
- Rutgers over 4. This one makes no sense to me. Schiano hasn't built a juggernaut but he's a good coach and they have momentum. They won 5 last year. Their OOC is @ BC, vs Wagner and @ Temple: they could and arguably should get 3 right there. All they need is 1 at that point to not lose and they're good enough to at least win some conference games amongst hosting Nebraska, Iowa, Indiana and Penn State while playing at Minnesota and Maryland.
I wouldnt be so sure about the Rutgers/BC game. I think Jeff Hafley is posed to have a (relatively speaking) breakout year for them.
I also like the Rutger over as well. Them and the MSU over seem like the best 2 bets on the board. Also not listed but I do like USC over 9.5 this year too. If Riley can get his system in place. With Williams and a relatively easy schedule outside Utah and ND they should roll.
Nebraska has a good chance of being record-wise while not necessarily improving as a team because their schedule is pretty favorable. Frost probably needs at least 8 wins this year to feel comfortable about his job prospects going forward, but getting your cross-division games shifting from MSU, UM, and OSU to UM, Rutgers, and IU helps a lot. I do think Rutgers will be feisty, so don't sleep on them maybe pulling the upset at home.
MSU was lucky last year and went 11-2 as a result; assuming some regression to the mean and 7/8 wins makes sense. Walker saved them multiple times and they somehow survived having a horrible pass defense that isn't likely to be demonstrably better. They weren't as bad as 2-5 in 2020 and weren't as good as 11-2 last year; we'll see which version of Mel Tucker MSU is going to be paying $10M/y for the foreseeable future this season.
ND at 8.5 feels about right; OSU is going to likely smoke them to start the year but then they're mostly playing blah teams (save for BYU) in the non-ACC portion of their schedule and then only Clemson in the ACC. USC to end the year might get hairy but this still feels like one of those ND teams that goes 9-3 but is a clear step behind teams will similar records. Getting a Jack Coan-level of performance out of a QB this year will be key.
Clemson is in a weird spot - they went 10-3 last year but lost to the good teams they faced and probably got lucky to not have lost 2 more games (they went 5-2 in 1-score games). They also lost both coordinators and will have a battle between highly-rated-but-somewhat-disappointing 2nd-year starter and 5* true freshman at QB. Oh, and Hunter Johnson, another highly-rated QB who has been bad at both Clemson and Northwestern. I think Clemson is on a bit of a downswing and I fully expect Dabo to continue to turn into a raging asshole as the losses pile up.
Until proven otherwise PSU is going to be fine but unremarkable and Franklin is going to keep parlaying vague interest from other teams into contract extensions that lock the Nittany Lions into the 3rd/4th spot in the division. He still can't field a competent offensive line and his offense is so boom-or-bust that it's hard to sustain that momentum for a full year.
UM at 9.5 wins feels right. They should coast through the OOC and other than a trip to Iowa (who is probably going to be mediocre this year) and Columbus should be heavily favored in their other games. MSU is probably the toughest home game (though early-season Maryland is always scary) but they'll be up for that game. Hopefully the defense rounds into form.
We have to chill calling MSU lucky... At some point it's no longer luck.
Going 4-0 in one-score games is not something you can assume you'll be able to repeat every year. That's the luck part I'm referring to. If they had gone 2-2 over that stretch (lose to UM and Nebraska, for example) the outlook is way different for them.
MSU isn't a trash heap under Tucker but history is littered with teams that had one great year because of timing and close wins and then revert to their steady state, which is probably 6-8 wins most years pending a bowl game. Some years it goes great and they jump to 10 wins, other years it doesn't and they drop to 5.
When I interact with a list like this I spend most of my time a) seething at the possibility that we lose to MSU one more freaking time; b) really disliking PSU; c) wanting Nebraska to be buried forever somewhere on the Great Plains; d) just not ever really making it to caring that much about Iowa; and d) dreaming like a schoolgirl that we go to OSU with a chance at a championship and don't humiliate ourselves.
I like Stanford over 4.5 wins. Last year was very uncharacteristic for Shaw due to atrocious QB play from Jack West. A full year of Tanner McKee makes them a bowl team at least.
Ohio State (sigh) over 10.5. I would have thought at least 11 for a team favored by double digits in every game as of now.
Tempted to take Penn St under 8.5. They are sure underdogs in three games now and Franklin will likely bungle another one or two.
Colorado under 3.5. Their non-conference is really tough (TCU, @AF, @Minn) and I only see 4-5 toss-up games at most in the conference schedule.
And MSU's luck *should* correct and go under 7.5. But we know how this goes.
Over 10.5 is never easy and should not be assumed. A 10-1 team entering the Michigan game is still at risk of the under.
I've gotta know. How did you sort your list?!? Its not alphabetic, its not predicted W/L, its not rivals at the top or by conference.
Scrolling through Draftkings and picking out teams of vague interest - no idea why they've sorted it this way either.