welcome college football fans! - vegasinsider.com€¦ · and conference usa teams, which were both...

VISIT VEGASINSIDER.COM FOR THE LATEST IN SPORTS GAMING INFORMATION

1

Football Weekly Football Weekly2014-15 Bowl Guide

Thanks for downloading your copy of the Vegas Insider 2014-15 College Bowl Guide. This is the third straight year that I was asked to lead this special project, and I was again honored that the leadership at VI considered me to help them put it together. Having once been one of the proprietors of StatFox, I’ve been in the business of sports betting information for almost 15 years now, and I can tell you assuredly that this time of year has always been one of my favorites, as the bowl games, the NFL action, college & pro hoops, AND the holidays are all converging. It truly is the most wonderful time of the year.

If there’s one thing I have learned from doing this, it’s that everyone need to get into a handicapping routine when they analyze the bowl games, and disruptions to that routine can be costly! In the first few years of the bowl guide generation, we tried producing different types of handicapping information. After ingesting many, many comments from readers, we were able to come up with what seems to be an ideal recipe for key bowl game information. I say this because the overwhelming majority of what I received from last year’s guide was positive. Of course, producing any type of tipsheet that contains winning selections will do that, but all-in-all, VI has judged this venture be a success. With that in mind, you will see that this year’s publication has changed VERY little, only updated with the latest information reflecting the 2014 season.

The Vegas Insider 2014-15 College Bowl Blast is everything you should need to do well this bowl season and enhance your holiday football viewing. We cover all 38 games, with a 2-page spread dedicated to each. I’ve always believed that this should be the most rewarding time of the season in college football, since at no other time are we given so much opportunity to prepare for each game. Whereas we are usually only given 5-6 days throughout the regular season, in most bowl games we are given 2-3 weeks. With that said, I believe Vegas Insider has put a product together to help you maximize that opportunity. If this is your first time reading one of VI’s downloadable tipsheets, we trust you’ll agree.

The centerpiece of the Guide is the picks from myself and VI’s group of print handicappers, who have spent countless hours since the games were announced breaking down the matchups, trends, and key statistics. They are VI Jim, VI Jason, and VI Paul. We will also be offering the sides and totals suggested by the VI Strength Ratings as picks as well. We welcome you to track these selections and ride the hot handicappers this bowl season. The publication doesn’t stop at just picks though, as you’ll get stat matchups, game logs, bowl game histories and trends for each teams, head-to-head analysis, and much more for every one of the 35 games. Plus, you’ll get my own featured editorial pieces detailing the motivational factors I find most important at bowl time, as well as conference-by-conference trends which will help you pick out strong & weak spots for each league.

If you’re like most bettors out there who look to find the hot capper, you’ll want to consider these pick highlights from the 2013-14 bowl season:

• My own record on Best Bets was 16-4 ATS (80%)• VI Consensus Picks were also 43-26-1 ATS (62%)• The 2-year total of our Consensus Picks is now 83-55-2, good for

28-games over .500!

There’s nothing like capping a season with a great run and that’s exactly what we did at Vegas Insider a year ago! You’ll find the rest of the records on the chart.

Aside from the great bowl info in this guide, there is plenty more to digest at VegasInsider.com. With continuously updated stat matchups, late-breaking injury information, line services, and expert picks from top handicappers, VegasInsider.com has left no stone unturned. So, if you don’t get enough out of this, we welcome you online to see how much else VI has to offer.

From the New Orleans Bowl game on December 20th through the GoDaddy.com Bowl on January 4th, we have all the action covered. However, we were thrown for a loop this year with the new playoff system. With the national title contestants not determined until the results of the Rose and Sugar Bowl games on January 1st, we are unable to cover the title game in this print edition. However, stay tuned to VegasInsider.com in the days leading up to January 12th for plenty of key game information.

On behalf of everyone at Vegas Insider, best of luck on the games, and best wishes for a warm and wonderful holiday season to all of you and your families.

Steve Makinen, Managing Editor

Conference by Conference Trends in Bowl Games ....................... 2 Seven Motivational Factors Checklist for Bowl Games .................. 8Early Bowl Game Betting Line Moves ............................................. 13 Bowl Game Coverage ..................................................................... 14WELCOME COLLEGE FOOTBALL FANS!

INDEX

All Games W L T PctConsensus 43 26 1 62%Power Ratings 40 29 1 58%Steve Makinen 39 30 1 57%VI Paul 36 33 1 52%VI Jason 35 34 1 51%VI Jim 35 35 1 50%Bettors Ratings 34 35 1 49%Effective Strength 32 37 1 46%

Best Bets W L T PctSteve Makinen 16 4 0 80%VI Jim 12 8 0 60%VI Paul 12 8 0 60%VI Jason 9 11 0 45%

2013-14 Bowl Guide Pick Records

2

THE GLOBAL LEADER IN SPORTS GAMING INFORMATION

AUGUST 30 – SEPTEMBER 3


A few years back I chose to eliminate the conference trends analysis, and I definitely heard about it from readers. To tell you the truth, I actually missed it a lot myself that season. The simple fact remains that certain conferences generally match up well with others in certain types of games and line scenarios. Lower level leagues may get more motivation from playing a power conference opponent. On the other hand, they may simply be outmatched. It is not the same in every situation however, and in this annual piece, I like to take a look at each conference, the teams representing it in bowl games, their opponents, and their specific performance trends when it comes to the postseason.

Although Florida State of the ACC is the reigning national champion, it has been nearly a decade of dominance by the SEC in college football, and once again, in 2014, that league is recognized as the premier collection of teams across the country. That is obvious, and with 12 teams playing in bowl games over the next few weeks, the league will be continuously on display. What is not so obvious is whether or not one should automatically back these teams with bowl game wagers. You can see from the Conference Bowl Records chart for the last five seasons that while the SEC is #1 when it comes to bowl game outright winning percentage, there are actually four other conferences that have been more reliable in terms of ATS success. In fact, it is American Athletic & Sun Belt teams that have returned the most on investment for bettors in that time frame, each beating the pointspread at better than 60%.

The real question to ask as a handicapper is…Do the oddsmakers even consider how conferences fare in their bowl games when setting lines, or is it just same-season analysis used? I can tell you from my own perspective that I don’t believe anything else goes into oddsmaking than the current year factors.

Therefore, it is to our advantage to look at recent history for edges when it comes to matchups by conference. Unfortunately, for our purposes, the massive realignment in college football of late has thrown a bit of a wrench into our analysis. In fact, for this year’s article, while recognizing the American Athletic Conference on the chart with the former Big East records, I will not be doing this for trends. We will start this year in analyzing matchup trends for that league, as in truth, the AAC is a broad mixture of former Big East and Conference USA teams, which were both strong performing conferences recently in bowl games.

So, let’s take a look at the 2014-15 bowl game outlook for each conference, while providing some top league-by-league betting angles you’ll want to consider as you analyze each game. The first thing you’ll want to make note of is the chart below showing the records for the last five bowl seasons by conference, overall, as favorites, and as underdogs.

ACCFor the second straight season, the ACC sends 11 different teams into bowl games. A year ago, those teams finished 5-6 SU & ATS. Most importantly however, Florida State captured the national championship. Clemson was a big winner too, taking a highly entertaining Orange Bowl game over Ohio State. Only Wake Forest, Syracuse, and Virginia are staying home for the holidays. These 11 teams will be matching up against five different conferences. Of course, the big game once again is the playoff semifinal contest involving Florida State. contest, where Florida State tries to give the ACC its first national title since 2000. Only four of the 11 ACC teams are favored in their bowl games however, so they will have to pull off some upsets to finish over .500. Here are some bowl game trends for the ACC that you’ll want to consider for 2014-15:

• Favorites were 9-2 SU & 7-4 ATS in the ACC’s 11 bowl games last year. ACC teams were favored in two of those, going 2-0 SU & 1-1 ATS.

CONFERENCE SU W-L (%) ATS W-L (%) Ov-Un (Ov%) SU W-L (%) ATS W-L (%) Ov-Un (Ov%) SU W-L (%) ATS W-L (%) Ov-Un (Ov%)ACC 18-23 (44%) 20-20 (50%) 17-24 (41%) 8-6 (57%) 7-7 (50%) 7-7 (50%) 10-17 (37%) 13-13 (50%) 10-17 (37%)AMERICAN ** 16-11 (59%) 17-10 (63%) 14-13 (52%) 7-4 (64%) 7-4 (64%) 3-8 (27%) 9-7 (56%) 10-6 (63%) 11-5 (69%)BIG 12 20-19 (51%) 16-23 (41%) 17-22 (44%) 15-8 (65%) 11-12 (48%) 12-11 (52%) 5-11 (31%) 5-11 (31%) 5-11 (31%)BIG TEN 15-24 (38%) 20-18 (53%) 17-22 (44%) 6-4 (60%) 5-4 (56%) 3-7 (30%) 9-20 (31%) 15-14 (52%) 14-15 (48%)CONF USA 15-13 (54%) 15-12 (56%) 9-19 (32%) 8-5 (62%) 7-5 (58%) 2-11 (15%) 7-8 (47%) 8-7 (53%) 7-8 (47%)INDEPENDENT 7-5 (58%) 6-6 (50%) 3-9 (25%) 3-0 (100%) 2-1 (67%) 0-3 (0%) 4-5 (44%) 4-5 (44%) 3-6 (33%)MAC 9-17 (35%) 7-18 (28%) 13-12 (52%) 4-4 (50%) 2-6 (25%) 6-2 (75%) 5-13 (28%) 5-12 (29%) 7-10 (41%)MOUNTAIN WEST 14-12 (54%) 13-13 (50%) 14-12 (54%) 8-3 (73%) 5-6 (45%) 5-6 (45%) 6-9 (40%) 8-7 (53%) 9-6 (60%)PAC 12 16-19 (46%) 18-17 (51%) 17-18 (49%) 14-10 (58%) 13-11 (54%) 11-13 (46%) 2-9 (18%) 5-6 (45%) 6-5 (55%)SEC 30-18 (63%) 25-23 (52%) 24-24 (50%) 27-11 (71%) 21-17 (55%) 21-17 (55%) 3-7 (30%) 4-6 (40%) 3-7 (30%)SUN BELT 8-6 (57%) 8-5 (62%) 7-6 (54%) 4-5 (44%) 3-5 (38%) 4-4 (50%) 4-1 (80%) 5-0 (100%) 3-2 (60%)WAC 6-7 (46%) 6-6 (50%) 6-7 (46%) 4-3 (57%) 3-4 (43%) 3-4 (43%) 2-4 (33%) 3-2 (60%) 3-3 (50%)* American Athletic Conference records represent results when many of its teams were recognized as the Big East Conference prior to 2013.** WAC football was dissolved prior to the 2013 season.

ALL BOWL GAMES (2009-13) AS BOWL FAVORITE (2009-13) AS BOWL DOG OR PICK EM (2009-13)

CONFERENCE-BY-CONFERENCE TRENDS IN BOWL GAMES


3


• ACC teams have now won three straight (2-1 ATS) BCS-level bowl games after going 1-12 SU & 3-9-1 ATS prior. They have also been a huge UNDER team in such games, going 18-6 UNDER since ’93. In addition to FSU in the Rose Bowl playoff semifinal game, Georgia Tech plays in the Orange Bowl against Mississippi State.

• In January bowl games involving ACC teams, UNDER’s and underdogs have been the wagers of choice. Underdogs have gone 11-3-1 ATS in these games, while UNDER the total has converted at a 10-2 rate over the L12. Florida State and Pittsburgh are both in January bowl games this season.

• Both bowl games of 2013-14 between the ACC and American Athletic Conference went UNDER the total. This year there are three such matchups, involving NC State, Pittsburgh, and Virginia Tech.

• ACC teams are just 2-7 SU & 3-6 ATS vs. Big 12 teams since ’94 in bowl games. In this year’s Russell Athletic Bowl, Clemson takes on Oklahoma.

• In bowl games between the ACC & Big Ten, underdogs have been a nearly automatic winning wager, going 8-4 SU & 10-1-1 ATS since ’99. Watch for fade opportunities against both Boston College & North Carolina on this trend.

• ACC teams have struggled mightily against Pac 12 teams in bowl games, going 1-7 SU & 2-6 ATS since ’07. Duke and Florida State are both taking on Pac 12 teams this season.

• ACC teams have enjoyed bowl success against teams from the SEC (6-5 SU & 7-4 ATS L11). Going all the way back to ’92, underdogs have covered nearly two of every three bowl games between the ACC & SEC, going 25-13-2 ATS, including 12-5-1 ATS since ’05. There are three different ACC-SEC matchups this season, Miami-South Carolina, Louisville-Georgia, and Georgia Tech-Mississippi State.

AMERICAN ATHLETIC The American Athletic Conference started building its own trend base last season with five teams playing in bowl games. The combined record of those teams was 2-3 SU & 3-2 ATS. With four out of the league’s teams having come over from Conference USA, I made a decision that it would be inappropriate to attribute any of the past Big East or Conference USA trends to this new league. For the record however, you can see from the conference chart that both of those league had been very successful in bowl games, as clearly oddsmakers had underestimated them in recent years. Both conferences were especially dangerous when playing as underdogs to power conference schools.

There are again five teams from the AAC in

bowl games for 2014-15, with Memphis, the league champion representing in the new Miami Beach Bowl against BYU. Cincinnati, East Carolina, Houston, and UCF will also be playing this postseason. Three of the five teams will be playing as favorites. Louisville, who spent the 2013 Season in the AAC, easily won in the league’s only bowl game as a favorite last December. UCF played the league’s highest profile game, beating Baylor in the Fiesta Bowl.

BIG TENThe Big Ten made a big jump this season by securing 10 different bowl bids. In each of the last two years, the league secured just seven. Now naturally the addition of Maryland and Rutgers, both bowl teams for 2014, helped, but even still, this seems to be a league retaking its spot in national prominence. Now for the bad news…ALL TEN teams are set up to play as underdogs in their respective bowl contests! Perhaps that could be a positive when you consider that all three teams that closed as favorites a year ago lost their games outright. The big game on this year’s Big Ten bowl lineup is at the Sugar Bowl, as Ohio State will be taking on Florida State in one of the two playoff semifinal games. However, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Nebraska are all in intriguing matchups against well-respected opponents. Here are some other angles you’ll want to remember regarding Big Ten bowl performance.

• In BCS-level bowl games, Big Ten teams have been somewhat successful, going 5-5 SU & 6-3-1 ATS. Seven of those games also went UNDER the total. Ohio State and Michigan State are in such games for 2014-15.

• Underdogs were 4-1 SU & 5-0 ATS in last January’s bowl games involving Big Ten teams. There are FIVE teams playing in these games this year.

• You have to go back to 2004 to find the last bowl game that a Big Ten team allowed less than 10 points in a game. Since then, in 73 games, Big Ten teams have allowed 29.3 PPG in bowl games on average.

• Non-BCS January Bowl games (Outback, Capital One, Gator, etc) have been the Achilles Heel for Big Ten teams, as they are 3-13 SU & 6-10 ATS in their L16 such games. Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa backers beware.

• Underdogs are 10-1-1 ATS in the L12 bowl games between the Big Ten & ACC, a trend against backing both Penn State and Rutgers in their respective contests.

• Big Ten teams are on a 4-3 SU & 5-2 ATS run in bowl games against “B” level conferences or less. Illinois takes on Louisiana Tech in such a game this December.

• Big Ten teams have won just four of their L20 bowl games against Big 12 foes but are 11-9

by Steve Makinen

4




ATS. Only one matchup this bowl season pits those two conferences together, Michigan State-Baylor.

• Big Ten teams are on a run of 3-2 SU & ATS vs. Pac 12 teams in bowl games. This might not sound like much until you realize they were 4-17-1 ATS prior that. Maryland and Nebraska will try to keep that momentum building in 2014.

• As an underdog of less than 4-points to SEC teams in bowl games, Big Ten teams are just 4-12 SU & ATS since ’93. However, when catching 4-points or more, they are 12-8 ATS. Minnesota, Iowa, Ohio State, and Wisconsin are all in that latter category over the next month.

BIG 12Last year the Big 12 placed just six teams in bowl games. This year, thanks to Oklahoma State’s improbable season final upset of Oklahoma, the number bumps to seven. Last year’s group split the ledger 3/3 both SU & ATS, and for 2014-15, all but two of the seven teams are favored to win. Baylor & TCU both had their sights set on the inaugural playoff bracket, but both was left out following the final week results. Still, they have a pair of intriguing high-profile bowl matchups to play. TCU takes on Ole Miss in the Chick-Fil-A Peach Bowl, while Baylor meets Michigan State in the Cotton Bowl Classic. Take a look at the conference handicapping angles for Big 12 teams in bowl games:

• BCS level bowl games have not been good to Big 12 teams over the last 13 years, as representatives are 8-11 SU & 5-14 ATS since ’02. That trend don’t bode well for TCU or Baylor.

• In the bowl games between Christmas and New Year’s, bowl game featuring Big 12 teams have been surprisingly low scoring, going UNDER the total at a 20-8 clip. West Virginia, Oklahoma, TCU, and Texas all play bowl games during this time period in 2014.

• Big 12 teams have been horrible in January bowl games, going 13-19 SU & 8-23-1 ATS since ’04.Put Baylor, Kansas State & Oklahoma State on the Big 12 list as potential fade opportunities on this trend.

• Since the end of the 2005 bowl season, Big 12 teams are a brutal 4-17 SU & 5-16 ATS as an underdog of 9-points or less. Alternatively, Big 12 dogs catching more than nine points in bowl games are on a 9-3 ATS run. That info would seem to suggest to bet against Oklahoma State and Texas.

• Domination is an understatement when it comes to bowl matchups between the SEC and Big 12 conferences, as SEC teams boast a 16-4 SU & 15-4-1 ATS in head-to-head games since ’03. Favorites are 11-3 ATS in the L14 matchups between the two

conferences. West Virginia, Texas, and TCU are all taking on SEC teams in upcoming bowl games.

• The Big 12 is on a run of 12-6 SU & 11-7 ATS against Pac 12 teams in bowl games, as well as 7-2 SU & ATS versus ACC foes. Favorable matchups for 2014 would include Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Kansas State.

CONFERENCE USAConference USA sent six teams to bowl games in 2013 but comes up one short of that number this season. Those six teams combined to go 3-3 SU & ATS. The two underdogs were both beaten soundly by a score of 68-13. A pair of other strong trends continued regarding Conference USA’ bowl performance and I will go over those below. For 2014, the teams are generally in the same level bow games as usual, with the flagship program, Marshall, the conference champion, heading to the Boca Raton Bowl to take on Northern Illinois in a battle of teams that won 23 games. The Herd are a double-digit favorite, UTEP is a double-digit dog in its game. The other three are somewhere in between. The following trends will indicate what history finds favorable in the various Conference USA bowl matchups for this season:

• Conference USA is now 12-5 SU & 11-5-1 ATS in its L17 bowl games. This seemingly remains an underrated league on the college football landscape. We’ll see if that trend continues in 2014.

• Conference USA is another league known for big scoring totals in the regular season, but collectively, its teams have outperformed their defensive standards in bowl games. In fact, 16 of the L18 CUSA bowl games have gone UNDER the total, as the teams have allowed just 18.9 PPG.

• January bowl games have proven to be a nice showcase stage for Conference USA teams, as they are 6-2 SU & 7-1 ATS in such games since ’07. UNDER the total is also 7-1 in those contests. North Texas won on New Year’s Day last year. Unfortunately, there are no teams that are playing in January 2015.

• Conference USA teams have proven reliable in the big bowl underdog role, going 13-5-1 ATS when catching 7-points or more in bowl games since ’00. UTEP was a 10-point dog at presstime and should fit that role in 2014 against Utah State.

• Playing in the small underdog role of less than 7-points has not been kind to CUSA teams, with a record of 5-17 SU & 6-16 ATS since ’01. Only Rice is a potential play.

• Conference USA teams have thrived in the small favorite role in bowl games. When laying less than 7-points, they are 15-7 SU & ATS since 2001. In those games, UNDER the total is a scintillating 17-5 as well. The games

ANALYZING BOWL GAME TENDENCIES BY CONFERENCE


5


of Louisiana Tech, Western Kentucky, and Rice should all qualify.

• Conference USA has built up an 8-game SU & ATS winning streak against MAC teams in bowl games. Marshall and Western Kentucky will look to make it #9 & #10 respectively in 2014.

• More on that angle, favorites have won and covered the spread in 13 of the L14 bowl games between C-USA & MAC opponents, and 11 of those 14 games went UNDER the total.

• Bowl games between the Mountain West and Conference USA teams have been remarkably low scoring, with 11 UNDER’s and 2 OVER’s since ’99. Both UTEP & Rice face Mountain West teams in 2014 bowl games.

• UNDER’s have been the result in eight of the L9 bowl matchups between Conference USA and power conference opponents. Louisiana Tech faces Illinois in the Heart of Dallas Bowl.

• Defense has been the secret of success for winning Conference USA bowl teams. Those yielding a modest 21 points or less in their bowl contests are 28-5 SU & 26-6-1 ATS since ’97. Amazingly, ALL but three of those 33 games also went UNDER the total. Incidentally, Marshall allowed just 20.8 PPG this season overall, and faces Northern Illinois in the Boca Raton Bowl.

INDEPENDENTSThe usual three Independent teams received bowl bids for a third straight season, Notre Dame, Navy, and BYU. The three were 2-1 SU & 1-2 ATS last season so they will look to improve on that this year, however, all three were underdogs as of presstime. The Irish are a TD underdog against LSU, while Navy & BYU are both underdogs of less than a field goal, to San Diego State and Memphis respectively.is a much smaller favorite against Middle Tennessee State, and BYU plays as the dog this time around, to Washington. Overall, this group of teams has combined to go 9-3 UNDER the total in their L12 bowl games. Let’s take a look at any angles that might help influence our betting in these teams’ bowl games this December.

• Notre Dame is the only Independent to play in a BCS bowl game ever, but the Irish are 0-6 SU & 1-5 ATS in those. Obviously none of this year’s lot is in that high level of game.

• In December bowl games, Independent teams are 11-7 SU & 12-6 ATS since ’04. All three teams (Navy, BYU, Notre Dame) are in such games this year.

• Against non-power conference opponents, Independents are on a 8-2 SU & ATS run in bowl games. Alternatively, against power conference schools, these same teams are just 2-14 SU & 3-13 ATS in bowl games since

’97. These trends would indicate to back Navy against San Diego State and BYU vs Memphis, but to fade Notre Dame against LSU.

• Independent teams are a perfect 6-0 SU & 5-1 ATS as a bowl game favorite since ’94. None are favored this year. Those playing as underdogs of less than 7-points, such as Navy & BYU, are just 5-10 SU & ATS since ’94 in bowl games.

MACAfter enjoying a record seven bowl bids in the 2012-13 season and winding up just 2-5 SU & ATS, things got worse on both accounts for the MAC a year ago. The numbers of bids dropped to five, and not a single one of those teams won or covered the spread in its game. Making matters worse, three of them lost outright as favorites. Committees apparently haven’t taken notice as again five teams have “earned” bowl bids for this season. Two of them, Western Michigan and Toledo, are favored in their games. Northern Illinois was again the league champion and will represent the MAC in the Boca Raton Bowl, but plays as a double-digit underdog to Marshall. Let’s see what the trends say about the MAC’s chances for bowl success this year.

• MAC teams are on a bowl skid of 2-10 SU & ATS overall in the last two seasons. They have been outscored by a 31.6-18.0 margin in the losses.

• Including Northern Illinois’ Orange Bowl loss to Florida State last season, January bowl games have been a struggle for MAC teams, as they are 3-10 SU & ATS in that month since ’07. Toledo will look to change that pattern in 2014.

• Two other rules of thumb lately about MAC teams in bowl games, specifically the timing of them. Play on MAC teams before Christmas Day (9-7 SU & ATS L16) but fade them after (6-19 SU & 4-20-1 ATS since ’08). For the record, Central Michigan, Western Michigan, Bowling Green, and Northern Illinois are before Christmas, and Toledo is after.

• MAC teams have gone OVER the total in six of their L7 bowl games when favored. Western Michigan & Toledo are both favored.

• As bowl game underdogs, MAC teams have pulled upsets only four times in their L31 tries while going 6-24-1 ATS. The chances for upsets by Northern llinois, Central Michigan, or Bowling Green are long. The teams from this league are also on an 8-1-1 UNDER the total run as dogs.

• Dating back to ’04, MAC teams are on an 11-game SU bowl losing streak (2-9 ATS) against power conference teams. Thankfully, no MAC teams will be overmatched as such


6





in 2014.• MAC teams have lost eight straight bowl

games against teams from Conference USA (0-7 ATS), outscored by 22.8 PPG. Favorites are on a run of 13-1 ATS in bowl games between these two leagues. Both trends would favor Marshall versus Northern Illinois and Western Kentucky against Central Michigan. In addition, since ’96, the outright winner in bowl games between these leagues has gone 17-0 ATS.

• Underdogs are on a 7-2-1 ATS run in bowl games between MAC & Sun Belt teams. Based on this trend, Arkansas State would be the play against Toledo, and Bowling Green would have the edge over South Alabama.

MOUNTAIN WESTLast year was a banner year for the expanded Mountain West Conference as it sent a record-high six teams to bowl games. Those teams split those contests 3/3 SU & ATS. It gets one better in 2014, as seven teams will be playing over the next few weeks. League champ Boise State has the highest profile matchup, taking on Arizona in the Fiesta Bowl. However, the Broncos have enjoyed success in that bowl series, pulling off upsets in both prior appearances. Only one of the teams from a year ago was favored, and Utah State took care of business. The Aggies are again favored, as is San Diego State. There are definitely some interesting matchups for bettors to analyze. Here are some trends that could affect your Mountain West bowl game handicapping:

• The pre-Christmas lower-tier bowl games have not been inspiring to Mountain West teams of late, as they are just 5-7 SU & 4-8 ATS in those contests since 2011. SIX MWC teams will each try to find the motivation to win these contests in 2014, all but Boise State.

• Mountain West teams have produced big point total games as bowl underdogs, going 18-9 OVER the total since ’03. The games have produced about 62.7 PPG with MWC teams going 14-13 ATS. Air Force, Boise State, Fresno State, and Colorado State are dogs this year.

• Totals have gone quite the opposite when MWC teams are favored, as 18 of 26 games have gone UNDER in this scenario. Utah State & San Diego State would trend this way for 2014.

• Power conferences beware…MWC teams are on a 9-4 SU & 8-5 ATS stretch vs. BCS level conference foes. Colorado State and Boise State each face Pac 12 schools.

• Mountain West teams have gone UNDER the total in 11 of 13 bowl games versus Conference USA since ’99. Favorites are also on a 7-2 ATS run in that series. Fresno State and Utah State face Conference USA

teams this year, with Fresno playing as an underdog, and the Aggies being favored.

• MWC teams are just 1-4 ATS against Independents. San Diego State faces Navy in the Poinsettia Bowl hoping to reverse that trend.

PAC 12Eight of the Pac 12 teams are in the 2014-15 lineup, down one from a year ago, and all but one of the teams is favored to win its game. Six of them are favored by 4-points or more so there continued success expected for this league for the rest of the season. Pac 12 teams were 6-3 SU & ATS in nine games a year ago. Oregon holds the league’s national title hopes in its hands, as the Ducks take on Florida State in one of the playoff semifinal contests. Arizona, USC, and UCLA are also in well-respected games in the next few weeks. Along with some key underdog/favorite trends, let’s look at recent bowl game betting angles regarding the Pac 12.

• Pac 12 teams are on a roll in bowl games, going 8-3 SU & ATS in their L11. Furthermore, they are 13-7 ATS in the L20.

• Since the Millenium, Pac 12 teams have been shined their brightest on the big stage, going 13-7 SU & 15-5 ATS in “old BCS level” bowl games. The record is identical for January bowl games. Oregon & Arizona are playing in such high profile games this season, and both Washington & UCLA have January scheduled contests.

• Pac 12 representatives in low level bowl games before Christmas Day have had a hard time getting up for those games as they are just 7-15 SU & ATS in such contests since ’98. Be wary of the motivational level of Utah.

• In the past, laying significant points with Pac 12 teams was not a worthy strategy, but they have done well of late, going 16-7 ATS as favorites of 4-points or more. The list of teams meeting that criteria is long and distinguished and includes Arizona State, Oregon, Stanford, USC, Utah, and Washington.

• Alternatively, riding Pac 12 teams as big underdogs is a sound strategy to employ. As underdogs of 4-points or more), Pac 12 teams are on a run of 19-5 ATS in bowl games since ’96. Unfortunately, unless there is some wild line movement in the UCLA-Kansas State game, this trend will go to waste in 2014-15.

• The sweet spot in terms of line ranges for fading Pac 12 teams comes from the +3.5 to -3.5 range. When they have been there, they are just 2-8 SU & ATS, making for some good money line wagering on dogs as well. UCLA & Arizona would be fade teams for 2014-15.


7



• Pac 12 teams have turned around past bowl struggles versus the ACC with a record of 7-1 SU & 6-2 ATS since ’07. Arizona State and Oregon take on ACC teams this year.

• The Big 12 has proven a tough matchup for the Pac 12, as the former holds a 14-8 SU & 13-9 ATS edge in head-to-head bowl action since ’03. UCLA and Washington could have their hands full.

• As noted in the Big Ten section, Pac 12 teams are on a 19-6-1 ATS run in bowl games versus their power conference rivals of the midwest, however Stanford did lose last year’s Rose Bowl game. USC & Stanford take on Big Ten foes in early bowl action.

• Pac 12 teams have gotten into some shootouts against motivated non-power conference foes, as they 8-3 OVER the total in the L11 games, which produced 69.0 PPG. Should that trend continue in 2014-15, play OVER in the Utah & Arizona games.

SECIts 12 out of 14 SEC teams making it to bowl games in 2014-15, and the league is getting the same level of respect it has for the last decade from those making the pointspreads. Only three SEC teams figure to be playing as underdogs in their bowl games. Alabama hopes to restore this league national champion status, as it faces Ohio State in the playoff semifinal game at the Sugar Bowl. Mississippi State, Ole Miss, and Auburn are also in benchmark games in terms of proving conference strength. The matchups certainly are not easy across the board for the SEC, and beating last year’s 70% bowl winning percentage will be a challenge. Here are the key bowl trends regarding SEC teams:

• In BCS bowl games not against one another since ’02, SEC teams are a profitable 14-6 SU & ATS. Mississippi State & Alabama will look to continue that dominance this season. Keep in mind though that both Alabama & Auburn loss last year outright.

• Since 1999, SEC bowl game underdogs of 3-points or more are 22-14 SU & 25-11 ATS. Even teams from the country’s best conference get motivation from being underrated. South Carolina, Ole Miss, and Texas A&M will try to extend this money line & pointspread success this year.

• SEC underdogs tend to go UNDER the total in bowl games as well, 32-18-1 since ’99. South Carolina, Ole Miss, and Texas A&M again fit the bill.

• There is a long standing trend of betting on underdogs in bowl games between the SEC & ACC. Teams catching the points in such games are 26-12-2 ATS since ’93 and 13-5-1 ATS in the L19. Opportunities are in place to ride South Carolina while fading Georgia & Mississippi State, team with bowl dates

versus ACC foes.• SEC teams boast an incredible record of

17-5-1 ATS in bowl games versus Big 12 foes since ’02. Ole Miss, Texas A&M, and Arkansas take on Big 12 foes in December matchups.

SUN BELTHaving lost some of its top programs to Conference USA prior to last season, the Sun Belt Conference sent just two teams to bowl games a year ago. However, both teams won outright & ATS and thus this much-dissed league rides a 3-game postseason winning streak in the 2014 bowl season. The three teams playing in contests this year will look to push that number to six in a row. All three games are expected to be tight, with each posting a betting line of a field goal or less. Only South Alabama is favored at press time. While the league has to be happy with seeing its bowl count go up one, two of its best teams were ineligible for bids. Thus the goal for this bowl season is to continue to win games and capture more respect. In any case, let’s see from the following angles whether or not wagers on South Alabama, LA-Lafayette, or Arkansas State make sense for this season.

• Underdogs are 11-5 SU & 12-3-1 ATS in the L16 bowl games involving Sun Belt teams. Arkansas State and potentially LA Lafayette could be plays depending upon the status of the Ragin Cajuns’ closing line at kickoff. Fading South Alabama is another option depending upon where that line closes.

• For being widely regarded as the nation’s lowest rated conference, the Sun Belt can take solace in an 11-9 SU & 12-7-1 ATS bowl record since ’05.

• Sun Belt teams are on a run of 7-3 SU & 8-2 ATS in pre-Christmas Day bowl games, a trend that would favor LA Lafayette in the New Orleans Bowl and South Alabama in the Camellia Bowl. Of those ten games, eight of them also went OVER the total.

• Sun Belt teams are on a 2-5 SU & ATS bowl game skid when favored, but boast a 6-3 SU & 7-1 ATS record in the L8 games as underdogs. Arkansas State is for sure an underdog, but we are still awaiting LA Lafayette’s status against Tulane. South Alabama was favored when we cut off editorial.

• Sun Belt teams have seen a long running trend of OVER’s in bowl games turn the other way of late, as UNDER the total is on a run of 6-1-1.

8




SEVEN MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS CHECKLIST FOR BOWL GAMES

In studying bowl games for the last 20 years or so, I’ve developed a checklist of key things to consider outside the norm of every day, every game football handicapping. I repeat this statement every year and in a few places throughout the guide but I have always believed that the bowl games offer the bettor the best chance at success, since the time to prepare is unmatched on the yearly schedule, especially considering the knowledge you have of the teams after 12 or 13 games. It’s not like the beginning of the season when each team’s prospects are defined by questions marks at so many positions. Handicapping the fundamentals at this time of the year is as straightforward as analyzing one teams’ stats against another and sprinkling in adjustments for schedule strengths. That part of it relatively easy, and most oddsmakers have this as a part of their routine for setting the lines. Therefore, in order to be better than them, and to achieve the success level that the professional bettors do, you have to go further. In my opinion, my seven factor checklist for bowl games does just that.

Much of the analysis I will be getting into later is stuff you can’t quantify, but it can prove to be the difference in whether or not a team “shows up” for its bowl game. Be careful though, as since I tend to be a “day of the game” bettor, I am able to capture any movement of these factors all the way up until game time. Unfortunately, some of the things that affect a bowl game and how it plays out happen in the days leading up to kick off, and early bettors can end up eating their bets if they were too overzealous early. Cases in point, coaching changes, disciplinary suspensions, travel difficulties, etc. In fact, just a day after learning its bowl fate, Wisconsin had to deal with the departure of its head coach. The Badgers then in turn disrupted everything going on in Pittsburgh’s bowl preparation by plucking its coach. Situations can make for a hectic and emotional disruption in game preparation for student athletes.

Again, I call these things my Seven Motivational Factors Checklist for Bowl Games. I’ve developed it by going through my notes from many bowl seasons past. The last two years’ bowl guides were actually the only times that I have ever shared this stuff publicly with anyone, and I only did so because I was beign so nicely rewarded! I like to think that this checklist has played a great role in my bowl game success as well as the popularity of this publication. I fully expect my “plan” to be reaping the rewards again this season.

So, without further ado, here is my list of Bowl Game Motivational Factors that I am sure to consider before each and every game. Along with the factor, I’ll provide an explanation and some examples from past bowl seasons, along with some games that might be affected by it in 2014-15. I put this info together less than a week after the bowl games were announced

so be sure to follow the news wires in the days leading up to the games for any pertinent updates.

EXCITEMENT LEVEL FOR THE GAME

It’s natural for athletes at different levels to be more up for a game than others.

This point is exacerbated in bowl games, as quite frankly, some teams are happy to be there, and others disappointed. Teams playing in a bowl game for the first time ever, or the first time in many years, are going to naturally be more excited than those who perhaps underperformed this season, or are going to a bowl game locale that is below their normal standards. Again, it’s impossible to quantify this excitement level, but let me assure you that if you don’t consider this factor, all the stats in the world are no good to you.

Last year I questioned the motivation of teams like Arizona State and Duke, and both appeared to be very disterested in their respective games. Here is a list of potential games that could be defined by one team’s mindset. See if you agree, or formulate your own opinions on other games. Again, whether or not a team really “shows up” to play is usually the difference in winning and covering.

• Nevada vs LA Lafayette – The Ragin’ Cajuns may be playing in a game close to home, but I question the motivation of players playing in the same bowl game for a fourth straight time. Kind of a “been there, done that” type of situation. At the same time, Nevada seems to be getting the shaft from oddsmakers on this one, playing to a pick em’ spread against the second place team from the nation’s weakest conference.

• South Alabama vs Bowling Green – in most cases I would take South Alabama’s situation of playing in a first ever bowl game to be a highly motivating factor. However, for this one I put the motivation factor on the other side, 100%. Bowling Green has played some tough opponents this season and at 7-6, champion of the MAC East Division, finds itself as an underdog to a team that arguably isn’t worthy of a bowl game. The Jaguars are 6-6, in just their third year of FBS football, and likely in over their heads in the postseason.

• Illinois vs Louisiana Tech – If you recall two years ago, Louisiana Tech posted a 9-3 record but was left out of a bowl game because of institutional confusion. No fault of the players. This year’s bowl game versus Illinois is their first chance to redeem that inequity. Don’t be surprised to see a fired up Bulldogs team, especially taking on a Big Ten opponent.

• Penn State vs Boston College – Most of Penn State’s current players thought that they would never get the chance to enjoy the bowl game experience thanks to penalties handed down by the NCAA for the Jerry Sandusky scandal. When that postseason ban was lifted for 2014, there were celebrations all over campus. The Nittany Lions qualified for a bowl game barely, but you can be sure that they are going to be

1


9


by Steve Makinen

the more excited of these two teams to be representing their schools in the Bronx.

• TCU-Ole Miss & Baylor-Michigan State – I group these two games together because there are similar motivational factors associated with both. TCU & Baylor were passed over on the season’s final week by Ohio State for the final playoff spot. Now, both are playing as favorites over high quality opponents that were in the national title picture earlier in the year but lost key games. So not only do the Horned Frogs & Bears need to do a lot to win, they have to do even more to cover. Beware…

• Oklahoma State vs Washington – I’m a big proponent of the belief that teams can be disappointed by the opponent that they are pitted against in a bowl game. Washington had a highly respectable season, going 8-5 out of the Pac 12. However, they only beat one bowl team, Illinois. Now, they are matched up with a 6-6 Oklahoma State team in what will be a somewhat forgotten about bowl game on January 2nd after all the big ones have played. The Cowboys meanwhile, are motivated by the fact that their huge upset of rival Oklahoma got them here to salvage any type of postseason bid. They would figure to be the more interested team here.

• Florida vs East Carolina – I’ll just go ahead and say it…how can Florida possibly be motivated for this game? In truth, the Gators played one highly respectable game all season long. Their coach has since departed and they put their 6-5 record on the line against an AAC opponent in the Birmingham Bowl. This is not why recruits signed up to play their college football in Gainesville.

• UTEP, Western Michigan, Duke, Minnesota – These are four schools looking for the taste of bowl victory for the first time or the first time in a long time. UTEP hasn’t won since ’67, Duke since ’61. Western Michigan has never won a bowl game in six tries, and finally, Minnesota has lost its last six times. Nothing satisfies a team’s hunger to win more than a win, or perhaps a Snickers.

I’m sure you can come up with some other example of games with reasons to question a team’s motivation, but these are the ones I thought of off the bat. As a tip however, I have generally found that this type of analysis is null and void for the bigger bowl games, as playing in a playoff game, or representing your league as its champion is motivation enough.

MOTIVATION OF THE POINTSPREAD

They may say otherwise, but don’t let the coaches and players fool you. They

know the pointspreads of these bowl games they are playing in. In fact, to me, the stance on this of major networks like ESPN has really softened of late, a real pleasant surprise to me considering that we are still dealing with college athletics. I absolutely love the new College Game Day format, as the analysts are constantly talking about the favorites and underdogs in games, and even the totals as well. In the playoff selection show, one of the

last main topics of conversation among the experts was the lines that were posted for the games. Very refreshing stuff.

That said, athletes take a lot out of the respect they are getting heading into a bowl game. Nowhere is this respect level more clearly illustrated than in the pointspread. Teams that feel slighted by this number tend to work harder to prepare and “prove everyone wrong” than those on the opposite side of the line. Those teams may perhaps take it easier in their preparation, or even worse discount their opponent altogether.

One of the perfect examples of this line of motivation came in the 2011 St. Petersburg Bowl from Tampa. Marshall was a 4-point underdog to Florida International, which on the surface didn’t seem too illogical. However, when you think of what Marshall’s players must have felt like being sizeable underdogs to the 4th place team from the country’s worst conference, it had to be motivating. Similar motivation can be derived from not being favored by enough. In the 2012 Heart of Dallas Bowl game, 13-1 Houston, a team that scored nearly 50 PPG, played as just a 6.5-point favorite against Penn State. Not only did the Cougars outscore the Nittany Lions by over 30 PPG on the season, they were motivated by the chance to take down a well-respected school from a power conference. A pumped-up Houston team gained its respect with an easy 30-14 win. Just a year ago, Pittsburgh of the ACC played as nearly a TD underdog to Bowling Green from the MAC. Any athlete with an ounce of self-respect is fueled by being an underdog to a physically inferior opponent.

So, for this year, take a look at the pointspreads closely and determine whether or not they match a team’s perceived strength. A few teams I have my eye on using this type of motivation are Nevada, a pick em’ against the Sun Belt’s runner-up LA-Lafayette, Bowling Green, an underdog to a 6-6 Sun Belt team, and South Carolina, a SEC power that plays as an underdog to a Miami team that didn’t know which way was up at times this season. That’s not all though, what about the big semifinal games? Both lines came out much higher than I suspected. Didn’t Ohio State gain its respect back with that thrashing of Wisconsin? Does Florida State’s winning streak mean nothing? It will be interesting to see how those games play out.

COACH SUCCESS

It’s not hard to understand, some coaches just do better than others in

using the extra preparation time involved in bowl games to get their game plans cemented and their teams physically and mentally ready to play. After all, these are the key ingredients to being a successful coach.

To me, Nick Saban of Alabama and Urban Meyer of Ohio State are the most well-known of the coaches that are best with extra time to prepare. Unfortunately for bettors, but fortunate for fans of football, the two face one

2 3

10





another in the Sugar Bowl semifinal. However, there are others that fly a little further below the radar. Jimbo Fisher of Florida State has not lost a bowl game and boasts a 3-1 ATS mark. Bronco Mendenhall of BYU, and Mark Richt of Georgia, are other examples of coaches who typically have their teams well prepared. Don’t overlook David Cutcliffe of Duke either, as his Ole Miss teams were 4-1 SU & 3-1-1 ATS in bowl games before coming to Duke, and his team performed very well last year against Texas A&M. Iowa’s Kirk Ferentz has led his team to a 9-4-1 ATS record in bowl games, and gets his team to play very well in the underdog role. Finally, George O’Leary’s UCF teams have won three straight bowl games, twice as heavy underdogs.

The list of coaches whose teams underperform is nearly as long, even though those coaches tend to not hang on to their jobs in many cases. Frank Beamer (7-11 SU & 7-10-1 ATS in bowls since ’94), Paul Johnson (1-5 SU & ATS L6), Brian Kelly (1-6 ATS L7), George O’Leary (2-5 SU & 3-4 ATS), Bill Snyder (2-8 ATS L10) and Rich Rodriguez (4-4 SU & 2-6 ATS L8) lead that group. Two new one’s I have added to the list this year are Tim DeRuyter of Fresno State, who two Bulldogs’ teams have lost by a combined 58 points in bowl games, and Gary Patterson of TCU, whose team may be 3-2 in its L5 bowl games but underperforms to the tune of 5-straight ATS setbacks.

One of the coaching enigmas in bowl games is with Oklahoma head coach Bob Stoops, whose teams seem to be hit or miss come bowl time. The fact that the Sooners are 4-9 ATS in their L13 bowl games would indicate more miss, but then again, his team walloped Alabama last year in the Sugar Bowl. While this might be understating it, the coach factor is certainly one that has to be given consideration when wagering.

STAR PLAYERS IN THEIR LAST CAREER GAMES

I have always been of the belief that special stars come up big for their teams in the final games of their illustrious careers. It seems simple on the surface and a natural measuring device for predicting big performances, but it’s not that easy. In fact, because of the number of star players that appear in bowl games each and every season, I’ve had to find a way to filter out the truly special players in truly special circumstances. That is the KEY step in the process. There are a few “filters” that are applied to determining whether a player fits our strict guidelines, and they are strict, as only about 3 or so players typically qualify per year. The last time I recall officially keeping this list and actually recording the wins and losses, the combined record of the elite group was 10-4 SU & 9-4-1 ATS over a 4-year span, so it does pay to single out these special players. Here are the filters, and again, we can’t stress enough how meticulous the handicapper needs to be in spotting these players. Stay tuned to the end of this section to find out this year’s qualifying players.

• Special player must have spent at least two seasons as a large contributor to his team. No one-year wonders.

• The elite player has set, or is close to setting, team and/or NCAA records for performances at his position.

• This star must have taken his team to levels that were typically uncustomary for that program. The logic here being that elite programs turn out stars year after year and therefore, they are truly not “special” to the team circumstances.

• The player doesn’t share the star spotlight with any other member of the team. He is truly the catalyst behind that team’s efforts.

• Junior class stars must be reviewed carefully as to the rumors surrounding whether or not that player will turn pro after the bowl game.

A few years ago, there were the most glowing examples of star players leading their teams in Robert Griffin of Baylor and Andrew Luck of Stanford. Both quarterbacks brought their teams to levels of respectability not seen in years. Baylor won its bowl game against Washington, 67-56, and Griffin took his team on his shoulders, leading it to 777 yards of offense. Luck’s Stanford team lost to Oklahoma, but he single-handedly kept them in the game. The two both cashed winning ATS tickets for bettors.

Admittedly, the past two year’s lists haven’t been nearly as distinguished, and in fact, I have felt like I have had to “force” potential options for bettors to consider. I have been forthright in cautioning readers however, and I am glad I did because the players combined to go 1-6 ATS in their respective bowl games.

This year’s list has three players on it, I provide my explanation, but gauge for yourself whether or not you deem them “star worthy”. With all due respect to players such as Wisconsin’s Melvin Gordon or Alabama’s Amari Cooper, they come from a long line of top performing players at their positions at their schools.

Oregon QB Marcus Mariota: It seems as if Mariota has been at Oregon for the last decade, but it’s only because he has been a huge star for the Ducks for his entire career. In fact, he has redefined the quarterback position at Oregon as one of prominence. Usually much more reliant on gimmicks and speed from its back and receivers, the Ducks have jumped on the back of Mariota the last few years and rode him to new heights. His 38:2 TD:Int ratio is off the charts for a college quarterback from a big time conference. A well-earned Heisman Trophy to wrap up his career and a nightmare coming for Florida State defensive coaches.

Marshall QB Rakeem Cato: Cato flies under the radar in terms of the college football landscape’s best players but he undoubtedly deserves a spot there. A four year starter for Marshall, Cato has made people reflect back to the days of fine QB’s at Marshall like Byron Leftwich and Chad Pennington. With 128 career touchdown passes and back-to-

4


11



back double digit win seasons, Cato has put Marshall football back in prominence. Expect a big day from him against Northern Illinois in Boca Raton.

Colorado State QB Garrett Grayson: Quick, name the last Colorado State quarterback to play in the NFL…if you said Bradlee Van Pelt, give yourself a round of applause. However, your answer will be null and void come next September, as the current Rams signal caller is headed to the big’s himself. Garrett Grayson has had a great career as a 2-1/2 year starter at CSU, and capped it this season with 3,779 yards, 38 TDS, and just 6 interceptions in leading his team to a 10-2 record. He was MWC player of the year as well. Utah will have its hands full in trying to contain Grayson in the Las Vegas Bowl.

DISTRACTIONS

There are many things that can cause distractions for a team between the

final game of the regular season and the bowl contest. Some of them come out of nowhere, and can throw a team for a loop at the most inopportune time. Distractions can come from all sorts of sources too, coaches leaving, players getting into trouble for grades, behavior, etc, and rendering themselves ineligible. Some teams even partake too much in the local flair, choosing to enjoy themselves a little too much while not adequately preparing for the real reason they are there, a football game. Sometimes teams can get caught up so much in why they are in one bowl game and not another that they can also lose focus. Again, these nuances can come from all sorts of sources, so be sure to keep your focus on the newswire in the days (and weeks) leading up to the games.

As usual, there has already been several coaching changes that will affect the bowl proceedings of 2014. Let’s get you caught up in case you missed it.

• Bo Pelini was fired at Nebraska and replaced by Mike Riley, former Oregon State head coach. Offensive run coordinator Barney Cotton will coach the Cornhuskers in the Holiday Bowl.

• Florida Head Coach Will Muschamp has been replaced by Jim McElwain. Defensive Coordinator D.J. Durkin will coach the Gators in the bowl game.

• With McElwain gone for Florida, Colorado State turns to offensive coordinator Dave Baldwin in the interim.

• Houston fired coach Tony Levine and replaced him on an interim basis for its Armed Forces Bowl game with defensive coordinator Dave Gibbs.

• Wisconsin’s Gary Anderson left unexpectedly following the Big Ten title game blowout loss and was expected to be replaced by Pittsburgh head man and former Madison native Paul Chryst. That news was expected to come after our print deadline however, and would affect Pittsburgh’s bowl preparation as well obviously. As far as the Badgers are concerned, former coach and

current Athletic Director Barry Alvarez will take the reigns for the Outback bowl game against Auburn.

Distractions don’t always turn out negatively for a team however, so be careful how you assess the specific situations. For instance, some teams rally around their new or departing coaches as a show of loyalty. Other teams may take a key injury and use it as a motivational source. There are several quarterback injury scenarios that will play out in the time leading up to the respective games. For now, we know that JT Barrett of Ohio State is out against Alabama, and Cardale Jones will try to replicate his success in the Big Ten title game. Deshawn Watson is also out for Clemson, but is replaced by sophomore Cole Stoudt, who has seen plenty of action with Watson being in and out of the lineup. Clint Trickett of West Virginia is listed as questionable after multiple concussions but is expected to be available, and finally, Tennessee’s original starter this season, Justin Worley, will not play after due to a shoulder injury. He missed all the action after October 18th. There were several other teams that suffered one or more injuries at quarterback throughout the season but played down the stretch with their current starters. The biggest non-quarterback name on the injury board is Georgia RB Todd Gurley, who will miss the Belk Bowl with a knee injury.

Another situation that you’ll want to watch closely is that of underclassmen players being badgered by media as to their NFL draft status for the spring. The responses and speculation can not only affect that singular player, but the players around him as well. Wisconsin’s Melvin Gordon has already declared for the draft to eliminate potential distractions for the Badgers. Florida State QB Jameis Winston has not made any official announcement about his draft status but it’s possible for him to declare early. Also on draft watch is Alabama wide receiver and Heisman finalist Amari Cooper. Lane Kiffin expects Cooper to go but he has yet to announce his plans. Other players being scrutinized for possibility of draft status and success in the draft include Dante Fowler from Florida, Everett Golson from Notre Dame, and Brett Hundley from UCLA.

REGIONAL OR HOME FIELD ADVANTAGE

Over the course of the last 21 seasons, 21 bowl games have been played at one of the teams’ home field. The host teams are 11-10 SU & 11-9 ATS in those games. In 2014, only one team will be hosting a bowl game, and that is San Diego State, who welcomes Navy to Qualcomm Stadium for 2nd time in three years for the Poinsettia Bowl game. Preparing for several weeks to play a game at your home field is certainly advantageous, but the results don’t show it as a major edge.

The advantage that isn’t always as glaring, and therefore often overlooked, is a regional advantage. There are many examples of teams playing bowl games in their home state, perhaps less than three hours from their

5

6

12





campus. The chances for that team to feel as if they are the home team by rallying their fans to the cause are much greater than the opponent, who, along with its fans, has to endure more rigorous travel to get to a bowl game.

The examples of the latter are many fold. From last year alone, I categorized six different games that had a significant regional field advantage. The teams with those edges were just 3-3 ATS however. In the prior season, that same group formed a much longer list and boasted an 8-5 ATS record. In the 2011 bowl season, I tabbed 10 games, and those were 8-2 ATS. That means for the last three bowl seasons, the combined record of teams with this advantage are 19-10 ATS, good for 65.6%. I don’t know what your expectations are for bowl success, but if you play every game in a given system and hit at that rate, I’d say you are doing pretty well.

You will find games like this on every year’s bowl card, as organizers due this to increase attendance figures and enhance the experience for the travelers. The trouble for oddsmakers is that this home field edge is impossible to quantify, and as a result, most bowl games not at a specific home field are treated as neutral games. Therefore, this is an easy spot for bettors to pick up at least a couple points of value on a line.

Although the list is a little shorter for this year’s games, here’s a look at the matchups that would qualify as regional or home field advantage games on the 2014-15 bowl board:

• LA Lafayette (REGIONAL) vs. Nevada in New Orleans Bowl

• South Alabama (REGIONAL) vs. Bowling Green in Camellia Bowl

• San Diego State (HOME) vs. Navy in Poinsettia Bowl

• UCF (REGIONAL) vs. NC State in St Petersburg Bowl

• USC (REGIONAL) vs. Nebraska in Holiday Bowl

• Texas (REGIONAL) vs. Arkansas in Texas Bowl• Stanford (REGIONAL) vs. Maryland in San

Francisco Bowl• Arizona (REGIONAL) vs. Boise State in Fiesta

Bowl• Baylor (REGIONAL) vs. Michigan State in

Cotton Bowl Classic• Houston (REGIONAL) vs. Pittsburgh in Armed

Forces Bowl

BIG LINE/TOTAL MOVEMENTS

I indicated earlier that I am convinced that players and coaches know the

pointspreads in their bowl games. I am NOT convinced however that they follow line moves like professional bettors too. As they say, things like this are best left for the pro’s. I also inferred earlier that it is impossible to quantify the distractions a team faces in its bowl preparations. Perhaps line movements are the best and only way to even think about doing it.

Therefore, while I wouldn’t actually consider a line moving a lot in a bowl game a motivating factor for a team, the move itself should stand as a red flag for you when wondering if some unusual situation might be “distracting” a team. In general, oddsmakers are sharp enough at this point in the season to set lines that stay steady over the month-long period of bowl games. In fact, only 23 of about 588 bowl games over the last 21 years have seen line moves of greater than 4-points from their opening number. That is just one of every 25 games on average, so if we’re lucky, we will see one or two this year.

I use the word “lucky” because the experts are basically paving the road to bowl winnings by telling you which team to bet on. As I just mentioned, 23 games over the last 21+ bowl seasons have seen line movements of more than 4-points. Here is the trend:

In bowl games between 1992-2013 that had closing lines more than four points off of their opening line, the team that the line moved towards is 14-8-1 ATS.

In most cases, line moves of this big are typically caused by some distracting factor, such as a coaching change, suspension, or injury, and rarely due to a “miss” by oddsmakers. In short, with a 63.6% ATS success rate, let the experts interpret the impact that the distraction will have for you.

The games you will want to keep an eye on this year could include:

• Nevada vs LA Lafayette – New Orleans Bowl – Nevada opened as a 3- point favorite but quickly became a pick em’ after early wagering.

• Fresno State vs Rice – Hawaii Bowl – Fresno State started out at minus-1.5 but was a 1-point underdog as of press time.

• Miami vs. South Carolina – Independence Bowl – Oddsmakers deemed this game to be a pick em’ at opener, but bettors pushed it to Miami by a field goal after just a few days of wagering.

Concerning totals, there are always a lot more games that move 4-points or more off their opening number by game time, but the reason for this can often be the game day weather. Regardless of the reason, bettors have been right at a 69-57 (54.8%) rate on totals moving 4-points or more. In the 2013-14 bowl season, bettors hit it right on just three of eight games. Most interesting about that is that all of the totals in that sample shot upward, as bettors were hoping and praying for OVER’s. Keep an eye on the numbers at game time, as while the totals were fairly stable in the first few days of opening, they typically experience their biggest moves in the hours before kickoff. The biggest move as of presstime was a 3-point bump upward in the West Virginia-Texas A&M game.

7


13


With 38 bowl games to choose from, here are ones football bettors went after early and moved the lines.

NEW ORLEANS BOWL - DEC. 20/ 11:00AM ET ESPN(201) NEVADA VS. (202) UL-LAFAYETTEThe very first bowl contest has bettors picking it apart. This is Louisiana’s fourth straight trip to the same bowl and one cannot help but think fans and players are a little bored despite the closer proximity and dropped from -3 to Pick. Also, the Ragin’ Cajuns are thought to be modest underachievers and faces a Nevada squad that can match their offense and is 5-1 ATS on the road this season. Our Take – Lean Nevada

HAWAI’I BOWL - DEC. 24/ 8:00 ET ESPN(219) FRESNO STATE VS. (220) RICEThough Fresno State was a division champion out of the Mountain West, they were not close to being the same unit as last year’s crew and comes into the bowl with a 6-7 record. Bettors are not impressed with the Bulldogs offense or defense and switched allegiance, taking Rice from +1.5 to -1. This could matter since the Owls are 7-1 ATS as favorites this season. Our Take – Rice covers

SUN BOWL - DEC. 27/ 2:00 ET CBS(229) DUKE VS. (230) ARIZONA STATEWhen you think of these two teams, offense is what comes to mind. Yet the total has slipped from 68 to 66.5 and here is a possible explanation. Both defenses allow more than 400 yards, however, when you review the – yards per point – statistic, Duke is an exceptional 5th in the country and Arizona State is a respectable 49th, which should generate more field goals than originally thought. Our Take – Lean Under

INDEPENDENCE BOWL - DEC. 27/ 3:30 ET ABC(231) MIAMI-FL VS. (232) SOUTH CAROLINA (SIDE AND TOTAL)Miami has blown up from a Pick to -3.5 against South Carolina. Certainly part of the reason is the Hurricanes have a startling 106 yards edge in defense. Another factor is historically, teams on extended losing streaks and non-covers (0-3 in this case) are normally productive wagers. Football bettors also do not believe either offense can be stopped and raised the total from 60 to 61.5.Our Take – Miami covers and Over

LIBERTY BOWL - DEC. 29/ 2:00 ET ESPN(237) WEST VIRGINIA VS. (238) TEXAS A&MOf all the bowls, this one had the biggest line move concerning totals. This one exploded literally the day it was released from 64 to 67, which sent a message wise guys were all over the original number. Though both defenses allow less than 28 points per contest, when they faced teams that could score like them, points were plentiful. If the weather is good,

the scoreboard should be flashing frequently. Our Take – Play Over

TEXAS BOWL - DEC. 29/ 9:00 ET ESPN(241) TEXAS VS. (242) ARKANSASThe total dropping from 47 to 45.5 makes sense coming into this bowler. Both Texas and Arkansas finished in the Top 30 in total defense, with the Longhorns holding opposing teams 10 points below their season average and the Razorbacks even better an 11.1. Two other factors to consider are Texas is 9-2 UNDER as an underdog and the Hogs are 7-0 UNDER as a neutral field favorite. Our Take – Play Under

ORANGE BOWL - DEC. 31/ 8:00 ET ESPN(253) GEORGIA TECH VS. (254) MISSISSIPPI STThese two squads do not give up a lot points but they do allow yardage and with how efficient both offenses can be scoring touchdowns, the total has crept higher from 60.5 to 62. Interesting to find when a Georgia Tech game moves in this direction, in this range, nearly 70 percent of the time they end up being involved in a contest which goes OVER the total. Our Take – Play Over

OUTBACK BOWL - JAN. 1/ 12:00 ET ESPN2(255) WISCONSIN VS. (256) AUBURNThe combination of Wisconsin looking horrible in their last game against Ohio State, losing their head coach and their recent 1-6 ATS bowl record (2-5 SU), has sent the Badgers from +4.5 to +6. Wisconsin is 11-3 ATS against team averaging 31 or more points the last few seasons. The two teams are a combined 0-7 ATS in their most recent outings, meaning somebody has to cover right! Our Take – Lean Wisconsin

COTTON BOWL - JAN. 1/ 12:30 ET ESPN(257) MICHIGAN STATE VS. (258) BAYLORBaylor is the top scoring team in the country at 48.8 points per game and Michigan State is No.7 at 43.1 PPG, so naturally the total jumped from 70.5 to 72. The Spartans are 17-6 OVER on the road with at least two weeks off and Baylor is 6-0 OVER as neutral field favorites. When the total moves upwards in this range, the OVER is a perfect 6-0 the past three years. Our Take – Play Over

SUGAR BOWL - JAN. 1/ 8:30 ET ESPN(263) OHIO STATE VS. (264) ALABAMAAs good as both these defense are, the betting consensus is they will not be able to stop the opposing teams offense. The total opened at 56.5 and has been moved to 59. Ohio State comes into this clash 9-1 OVER after allowing 125 or less rushing yards in two straight games, while Alabama is 11-2 OVER as neutral field favorites. The only aspect that makes this somewhat uncertain is how QB Cardale Jones will react when the Crimson Tide brings the pressure. Our Take – Lean Over

RECORD: 55-49-1

EARLY BOWL GAME BETTING LINE MOVES


Offensive Statistics Defensive Statistics2014 Season PPG FD RUSHING PASSING YPPT PPG FD RUSHING PASSING YPPT TOD PDIF

THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS

Offensive Statistics Defensive Statistics2014 Road/Neutral PPG FD RUSHING PASSING YPPT PPG FD RUSHING PASSING YPPT TOD PDIF

14




There are only two quarterbacks in college football history to pass for 9,000 or more yards and rush for 3,000 or more and both played in Nevada’s Pistol offense. Colin Kaepernick was the first and senior Cody Fajardo is the second. Fajardo will take his act on the road for the first bowl game of the season and the Wolf Pack is 4-2 and 5-1 ATS away from Reno. This was supposed to be Louisiana’s best and deepest team under coach Mark Hudspeth, but a 1-3 start shook the foundation. The Ragin’Cajuns stormed back to win six in a row but a stunning 35-16 home loss to Appalachian State kept them from repeating as champions. The running tandem of Elijah McGuire and Alonzo Harris is terrific, but McGuire is the eye-catcher, with a 7.8 yards per carry average. This is ULL’s fourth straight time here, which makes one consider complacency.

(201) NEVADA [SU:7-5 | ATS:7-5]

Head Coach: Brian Polian • Conference: Mountain West

TEAMS OPEN LINE LINE LINE LINE CLOSE SCORE

Nevada -1 60.5

LA Lafayette 61 PK

NEW ORLEANS BOWL • 11 AM ET (ESPN) – DEC 20, 2014

(202) LA LAFAYETTE (PK | 60.5) [SU:8-4 | ATS:7-5]Head Coach: Mark Hudspeth • Sun Belt

NEVADA 31.3 22 44-215 [4.9] 31-19-197 [6.3] 13.2 28.2 24 37-179 [4.8] 39-25-271 [6.9] 16.0 +11 +3.1 LA LAFAYETTE 30.6 21 42-229 [5.5] 28-18-188 [6.7] 13.6 27.9 20 36-147 [4.1] 34-23-275 [8.0] 15.1 +3 +2.7

NEVADA 34.0 22 45-226 [5.0] 29-18-186 [6.5] 12.1 28.3 26 41-207 [5.1] 37-24-244 [6.6] 15.9 +10 +5.7 LA LAFAYETTE 29.7 21 45-236 [5.3] 25-15-169 [6.8] 13.6 27.7 20 34-126 [3.7] 36-26-285 [8.0] 14.8 +5 +2.0

NEVADA 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 S UTAH 16 -24.5 47.5 28-19 W L U 244 4.4 303 7.4 2 156 7.1 224 5.3 29/5/14 WASHINGTON ST 40 +3 67.5 24-13 W W U 214 3.8 110 5.2 0 38 2.1 389 6.8 29/13/14 at ARIZONA 53 +20 66.5 28-35 L W U 108 2.7 321 8.2 0 229 6.0 278 10.7 19/27/14 at SAN JOSE ST 27 -7 55 21-10 W W U 192 5.3 64 3.6 0 170 4.6 276 6.0 310/4/14 BOISE ST 51 +3.5 53.5 46-51 L L O 156 5.2 306 7.1 4 224 4.7 346 11.2 310/11/14 COLORADO ST 44 +2 64 24-31 L L U 160 4.4 297 5.9 1 119 3.5 326 9.1 110/18/14 at BYU 44 +10 58.5 42-35 W W O 126 3.5 285 7.1 0 193 4.9 408 6.5 310/25/14 at HAWAII 30 -3 55 26-18 W W U 299 4.9 128 4.7 1 102 3.5 201 6.3 211/1/14 SAN DIEGO ST 40 -2 48.5 30-14 W W U 229 4.9 109 4.5 1 135 4.7 189 5.3 311/15/14 at AIR FORCE 37 +3 53 38-45 L L O 223 5.0 275 7.6 1 342 5.3 129 8.6 011/22/14 FRESNO ST 35 -7.5 62.5 20-40 L L U 227 6.0 126 5.3 4 238 4.6 313 6.7 211/29/14 at UNLV 22 -7 62.5 49-27 W W O 408 7.7 46 3.5 1 205 5.7 171 4.4 4LA LAFAYETTE 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 SOUTHERN 10 -38.5 58.5 45-6 W W U 248 6.0 264 7.3 2 77 2.4 202 5.1 09/6/14 LOUISIANA TECH 45 -16 58.5 20-48 L L O 178 5.2 237 5.4 3 238 6.8 295 8.9 09/13/14 at OLE MISS 58 +25.5 59 15-56 L L O 193 5.2 129 4.2 4 214 6.1 340 9.4 19/20/14 at BOISE ST 51 +17 59.5 9-34 L L U 67 2.9 174 4.5 1 262 5.5 237 7.6 010/4/14 GEORGIA ST 13 -16.5 63.5 34-31 W L O 195 6.1 266 8.6 0 138 3.7 287 9.3 010/14/14 at TEXAS ST UNIV 30 +2.5 62 34-10 W W U 288 5.0 240 10.4 1 94 2.7 176 7.7 210/21/14 ARKANSAS ST 34 +3 59 55-40 W W O 419 7.5 102 6.0 0 253 6.8 342 8.8 111/1/14 S ALABAMA 28 -7 57 19-9 W W U 196 5.0 216 7.7 1 66 1.9 270 7.7 111/8/14 at NEW MEXICO ST 13 -16.5 67.5 44-16 W W U 244 4.5 158 6.9 0 103 3.1 204 6.0 411/15/14 at LA MONROE 29 -6.5 51.5 34-27 W W O 282 6.0 174 12.4 1 -39 -1.9 483 8.6 311/22/14 APPALACHIAN ST 31 -8 62.5 16-35 L L U 99 2.8 160 4.7 0 232 4.9 195 8.9 211/29/14 at TROY 19 -9 60 42-23 W W O 344 7.0 142 7.5 0 122 3.8 272 8.0 2

OFFENSIVE STATISTICS DEFENSIVE STATISTICSRUSHING PASSING RUSHING PASSING



15

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS

HEAD-TO-HEAD HISTORY

TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


15


RECENT NEW ORLEANS BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/20/09 SOUTHERN MISS (CUSA) 32 MIDDLE TENN ST (SBC) 42 -3.5 61.5 MIDDLE TENN ST (SBC) MIDDLE TENN ST (SBC) DOG DOG OVER12/18/10 TROY (SBC) 48 OHIO U (MAC) 21 -2 57.5 TROY (SBC) TROY (SBC) FAV FAV OVER12/17/11 SAN DIEGO ST (MWC) 30 LA LAFAYETTE (SBC) 32 -6 60.5 LA LAFAYETTE (SBC) LA LAFAYETTE (SBC) DOG DOG OVER12/22/12 LA LAFAYETTE (SBC) 43 EAST CAROLINA (CUSA) 34 -6.5 70 LA LAFAYETTE (SBC) LA LAFAYETTE (SBC) FAV FAV OVER12/21/13 TULANE (CUSA) 21 LA LAFAYETTE (SBC) 24 -1 50.5 LA LAFAYETTE (SBC) LA LAFAYETTE (SBC) DOG DOG UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Saturday, December 20, 2014 - (201) NEVADA at (202) LA LAFAYETTE (0)Nevada* Nevada* Nevada Nevada* Nevada Nevada LA Lafayette Nevada

Saturday, December 20, 2014 - (201) NEVADA at (202) LA LAFAYETTE - TOTAL (60.5)UNDER OVER* UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER

MERCEDES-BENZ SUPERDOME (NEW ORLEANS, LA)

• LA LAFAYETTE is 10-2 ATS(L5Y) - Against efficient offenses averaging less than 13.2 yards per point(CS)

• NEVADA is 4-9 ATS(L3Y) - Against lesser defensive teams yielding more than 5.7 yards per play(CS)

• NEVADA is 9-2 UNDER(L2Y) - Against decent offensive teams averaging more than 5.7 yards per play(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?201 NEVADA 60.5 38 NEV 31.6 NEV 29.4 28.2 202 LA LAFAYETTE 0 31 6.8 24.4 UNDER 27.7 32.1

These teams open the bowl season in New Orleans, which means home-state advantage for the Ragin’ Cajuns. And in fact, they will be gunning for their fourth consecutive victory in this game, following wins over Tulane (24-21 in 2013), East Carolina (43-34 in 2012) and San Diego State (32-30 in 2011). The Wolf Pack won the only other matchup -- 38-14 in 1995.

Louisiana-Lafayette is making its fourth straight appearance in the New Orleans Bowl and the Ragin’ Cajuns will again be enjoying a huge regional home field advantage. In last year’s game, this bowl was a battle for bragging rights between Louisiana natives. Even still, LA-Lafayette was the winner over host Tulane, and now boasts a perfect 3-0 SU & ATS record in this game. That decision extended a dominant run by Sun Belt teams in this bowl series. SBC clubs have swept the last five New Orleans Bowl games SU & ATS, and are an impressive 8-1 ATS dating back to 2005. Regarding totals, last year’s UNDER snapped a string of eight straight games going OVER the total.

Jim says: How bored can a team be with playing in the same bowl game for a fourth straight season? For 2014, Louisiana-Lafayette is making its fourth straight appearance in the New Orleans Bowl and rightfully, should not even be here, as Georgia Southern is the true champ of the Sun Belt, just ineligible to be here yet. So why is this line so far off from what typical power ratings were showing all season? Are oddsmakers giving the Ragin’ Cajuns a full 3-4 points for home field advantage? If so, I disagree. I believe much of that advantage is negated by the fact that fans will be expected to make the short trip over for a fourth straight year. New Orleans is a fun town, but not that fun. A disrespected Nevada team gets it done.

RECENT NEVADA BOWL GAME LOG RECENT LA LAFAYETTE BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/30/08 MARYLAND (Humanitarian) 35-42 L -2 L 61O 12/17/11 SAN DIEGO ST (New Orleans) 32-30 W 6 W 60.5O12/24/09 SMU (Hawaii) 10-45 L -11 L 69.5U 12/22/12 EAST CAROLINA (New Orleans) 43-34 W -6.5 W 70O1/9/11 BOSTON COLLEGE (San Francisco) 20-13 W -7.5 L 54U 12/21/13 TULANE (New Orleans) 24-21 W 1 W 50.5U12/24/11 SOUTHERN MISS (Hawaii) 17-24 L 7 T 65U12/15/12 ARIZONA (New Mexico) 48-49 L 8.5 W 79.5O

RECENT NEVADA BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT LA LAFAYETTE BOWL GAME TRENDS* NEVADA is just 1-6 SU & 2-4-1 ATS in its L7 bowl games * LA LAFAYETTE is 3-0 SU & ATS in bowl games, all in New Orleans* Five of L7 NEVADA bowl games went UNDER the total * Two of LAL's three bowl game wins were upset victories* UNDERDOGS are 6-1-1 ATS in NEVADA's past eight lined bowl games * RAGIN CAJUNS beat MWC's San Diego St in 2011 bowl game



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


16




While Ohio State received all the props for using a third-string quarterback to win the Big Ten title, Utah State played the back half of their schedule with their fourth string quarterback and closed 5-1 (3-3 ATS). The Aggies had a couple of mediocre defensive outings but still held opposing teams 6.1 PPG below their scoring average, thanks to the tackling machine brothers Zach and Nick Vigil (261 tackles and 16 sacks). UTEP is in a bowl for the first time since 2010 and only their fifth since 2000. They’ve had a strong turnaround this year, coach Sean Kugler’s second at the helm, going from 2-10 last year to 7-5 (8-3-1 ATS) this year. The Miners developed a stellar ground attack which rushed for almost 220 yards a game and really kept the chains moving at 4.9 yards per carry. Utah State the better team but UTEP will be jacked for this appearance.

NEW MEXICO BOWL • 2:20 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 20, 2014

UTEP 28.3 18 44-215 [4.9] 22-12-144 [6.6] 12.7 28.7 16 33-171 [5.1] 26-13-201 [7.8] 13.0 +9 -0.4 UTAH ST 27.4 17 36-172 [4.8] 29-18-209 [7.2] 13.9 20.8 20 39-129 [3.3] 36-19-233 [6.5] 17.4 +10 +6.6 UTEP 22.7 15 38-153 [4.0] 25-14-170 [6.9] 14.2 33.8 15 37-187 [5.1] 20-11-183 [9.1] 10.9 +1 -11.1UTAH ST 20.4 16 34-147 [4.3] 28-18-205 [7.2] 17.3 23.1 22 40-142 [3.6] 37-21-251 [6.7] 17.0 +4 -2.7

UTEP 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 at NEW MEXICO 27 +10 56.5 31-24 W W U 330 7.5 116 5.3 0 410 7.9 67 7.4 39/6/14 TEXAS TECH 42 +21 65.5 26-30 L W U 277 5.3 116 4.5 0 226 8.1 278 9.0 19/13/14 NEW MEXICO ST 13 -10 55.5 42-24 W W O 344 5.9 126 7.9 1 90 4.3 335 8.2 29/27/14 at KANSAS ST 57 +27.5 53.5 28-58 L L O 59 1.9 201 7.2 0 188 5.1 263 13.8 110/4/14 at LOUISIANA TECH 45 +12.5 56 3-55 L L O 81 2.3 143 5.1 5 256 6.0 187 11.0 210/11/14 OLD DOMINION 27 -2 63 42-35 W W O 334 6.5 152 5.6 0 161 5.8 196 7.8 010/25/14 at TX-SAN ANTONIO 27 +14 47 34-0 W W U 160 3.5 191 10.6 0 38 1.5 32 1.6 211/1/14 SOUTHERN MISS 23 -8 55 35-14 W W U 107 2.5 127 5.5 1 93 3.4 309 6.6 511/8/14 at W KENTUCKY 38 +9 69 27-35 L W U 236 5.1 158 7.2 1 64 3.0 324 9.5 011/15/14 NORTH TEXAS 24 -6 47.5 35-17 W W O 351 7.6 87 7.9 1 100 3.3 101 3.7 111/21/14 at RICE 33 +7.5 48.5 13-31 L L U 53 2.1 209 7.0 2 165 3.9 227 10.3 111/29/14 MIDDLE TENN ST 29 -3 52 24-21 W T U 250 5.2 106 8.2 0 259 5.9 99 5.8 2UTAH ST 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/31/14 at TENNESSEE 49 +3 51 7-38 L L U 100 4.2 144 4.1 3 110 2.8 273 6.8 09/6/14 IDAHO ST 26 -37 52 40-20 W L O 311 6.9 116 3.9 2 101 3.2 307 6.5 49/13/14 WAKE FOREST 29 -15.5 45.5 36-24 W L O 60 1.7 331 7.5 3 -25 -1.0 257 5.1 39/20/14 at ARKANSAS ST 34 +2.5 45.5 14-21 L L U 145 3.9 268 5.7 1 126 2.7 190 5.8 410/3/14 at BYU 44 +21 53 35-20 W W O 136 3.0 321 12.8 1 154 4.5 271 6.8 410/11/14 AIR FORCE 37 -6.5 50 34-16 W W U 77 2.8 311 10.0 1 155 3.0 224 7.7 410/18/14 at COLORADO ST 44 +5.5 54.5 13-16 L W U 100 5.3 160 5.2 1 75 1.9 243 7.6 010/25/14 UNLV 22 -17 50 34-20 W L O 178 3.8 266 9.2 1 15 0.6 267 7.0 311/1/14 at HAWAII 30 -3 41.5 35-14 W W O 235 4.7 230 14.4 0 98 3.2 356 7.4 311/7/14 at WYOMING 27 -7.5 48 20-3 W W U 206 6.2 150 8.8 1 151 4.3 212 5.3 211/15/14 NEW MEXICO 27 -20.5 52 28-21 W L U 272 7.6 150 7.1 1 246 5.0 154 8.6 111/21/14 SAN JOSE ST 27 -14.5 47 41-7 W W O 313 7.5 108 4.7 1 191 3.7 61 2.9 011/29/14 at BOISE ST 51 +10 55 19-50 L L O 109 3.6 159 5.7 3 283 5.2 215 7.7 1



(203) UTEP [SU:7-5 | ATS:8-3-1]

Head Coach: Sean Kugler • Conference: C-USA

(204) UTAH ST (-10 | 49) [SU:9-4 | ATS:6-7]Head Coach: Matt Wells • Conference: Mountain West


UTEP 52 49

Utah St -11 -10


17

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


17


UNIVERSITY STADIUM (ALBUQUERQUE, NM)

RECENT NEW MEXICO BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/19/09 FRESNO ST (WAC) 28 WYOMING (MWC) 35 -10 54.5 WYOMING (MWC) WYOMING (MWC) DOG DOG OVER12/18/10 BYU (MWC) 52 UTEP (CUSA) 24 -11 51 BYU (MWC) BYU (MWC) FAV FAV OVER12/17/11 TEMPLE (MAC) 37 WYOMING (MWC) 15 -7 51 TEMPLE (MAC) TEMPLE (MAC) FAV FAV OVER12/15/12 ARIZONA (P12) 49 NEVADA (MWC) 48 -8.5 79.5 ARIZONA (P12) NEVADA (MWC) FAV DOG OVER12/21/13 WASHINGTON ST (P12) 45 COLORADO ST (MWC) 48 -4 64 COLORADO ST (MWC) COLORADO ST (MWC) DOG DOG OVER

• UTAH ST is 15-5 ATS(L5Y) - Against strong rushing teams averaging more than 4.7 yards per carry(CS)

• UTEP is 3-9 ATS(L2Y) - AS double digit underdog• UTAH ST is 7-1 UNDER(L3Y) - Non-conference VS NON-BIG 5

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?203 UTEP 49 29 19.5 19.1 14.0 204 UTAH ST -10 42 -13.8 29.3 28.3 36.4 UST

RECENT UTEP BOWL GAME LOG RECENT UTAH ST BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/23/88 SOUTHERN MISS (Independence) 18-38 L -1 L - 12/17/93 BALL ST (Las Vegas) 42-33 W W O12/28/00 BOISE ST (Humanitarian) 23-38 L 9 L 66.5U 12/29/97 CINCINNATI (Humanitarian) 19-35 L 2 L 46.5O12/29/04 COLORADO (Texas) 28-33 L 3 L 55O 12/17/11 OHIO U (Famous Idaho Potato) 23-24 L 0 L 62U12/21/05 TOLEDO (Godaddy) 13-45 L 3 L 62.5U 12/15/12 TOLEDO (Famous Idaho Potato) 41-15 W -10 W 60.5U12/18/10 BYU (New Mexico) 24-52 L 10.5 L 51O 12/26/13 N ILLINOIS (Poinsettia) 21-14 W -2.5 W 55.5U

RECENT UTEP BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT UTAH ST BOWL GAME TRENDS* UTEP hasn't won bowl game since '67 Sun Bowl, going 0-5 SU & ATS * FAVORITES are 3-0 SU & ATS in UTAH ST bowl games* UTEP was crushed by MWC's BYU in last bowl game * The L3 UTAH ST bowl games went UNDER the total* All four of UTEP's recent bowl losses were as UNDERDOG * AGGIES' L2 bowl game victories came as FAVORITES

These teams will meet in the New Mexico Bowl for the first time since a home-and-home series way back in 1960-61. The Aggies won both of those matchups in similar games -- 20-7 and 21-6. UTEP was blown out in its only other appearance in this bowl, 52-24 by BYU in 2010 -- their last bowl appearance. The Miners’ last bowl win came in 1967.

This will be the ninth annual New Mexico Bowl game and just the second one that matches a team from the Mountain West Conference against one from Conference USA. The last time that happened was in 2010, and this same UTEP team was whipped by BYU, 52-24. Being a key game for the conference, MWC teams have gone 6-1 ATS over the last seven seasons. Only Wyoming in 2011 failed to beat the pointspread. OVER the total has also been a very profitable wager, as six in a row have surpassed the posted number heading into 2014. The last two years’ games produced 95.0 PPG.

Steve Makinen says: Prior to its loss to Boise State in the season finale, Utah State’s defense had been on a tear, holding 11 straight opponents to 24 points or less while yielding 16.5 PPG. The Aggies’ strength is their run defense, as they held opponents to just 3.3 yards per carry. That was nearly a full yard less than their opponents typically gained. UTEP relies on its run offense, running the ball twice for every pass it throws. From a matchup perspective, the Miners are going to have their hands full offensively in this one, as they are not real explosive through the air. Utah State is down to its 16th string quarterback (sarcastic), and hasn’t developed any real offensive consistency all year. Look for a lower scoring affair.

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Saturday, December 20, 2014 - (203) UTEP vs. (204) UTAH ST (-10)UTEP Utah St Utah St Utah St Utah St UTEP Utah St Utah St

Saturday, December 20, 2014 - (203) UTEP vs. (204) UTAH ST - TOTAL (49)OVER UNDER OVER UNDER* OVER UNDER OVER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


18




Utah had a bit of jerky-ride this past season at 8-4, nevertheless, a vast improvement after a couple of 5-7 campaigns. The team speed was the most notable difference about this squad, far superior to what they had shown in the Pac-12 previously. Football bettors are glad to see a Kyle Whittingham-coached team back in the postseason since he is 7-1 and 6-2 ATS. The Utes will be the stronger and faster team but faces a very good Colorado State offense that finished 12th in yards gained. The Rams will be without the head coach that turned the program around in Jim McElwain who took the Florida job. Colorado State averaged 35.9 PPG and their offensive is built around three very good players. Quarterback Garrett Grayson (32 TD’s, 6 INT’s) RB Dee Hart (6.7 YPC) and WC Rashard Higgins (89 catches) who make the Rams go.

LAS VEGAS BOWL • 3:30 PM ET (ABC) – DEC 20, 2014

UTAH (23) 30.2 19 43-176 [4.1] 29-17-198 [6.8] 12.4 26.2 21 41-158 [3.9] 35-20-245 [7.1] 15.4 +4 +4.0 COLORADO ST 35.9 24 35-172 [4.9] 34-22-326 [9.5] 13.9 23.4 22 40-188 [4.7] 34-18-227 [6.7] 17.7 +3 +12.5

UTAH 26.5 16 43-160 [3.7] 25-16-152 [6.1] 11.8 21.8 20 41-153 [3.7] 32-18-226 [7.1] 17.4 +8 +4.7 COLORADO ST 28.7 23 32-132 [4.1] 39-24-303 [7.8] 15.2 26.2 25 45-214 [4.8] 34-19-250 [7.3] 17.7 -3 +2.5

UTAH 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/28/14 IDAHO ST 26 -40.5 56.5 56-14 W W O 238 5.2 351 11.0 1 179 4.1 158 4.0 09/6/14 FRESNO ST 35 -13 65.5 59-27 W W O 258 4.8 268 9.9 0 55 1.4 283 7.1 19/20/14 at MICHIGAN 42 +3 54 26-10 W W U 81 2.2 205 7.6 1 118 3.3 190 4.9 49/27/14 WASHINGTON ST 40 -12.5 60 27-28 L L U 192 4.8 165 4.1 1 78 3.1 417 6.8 310/4/14 at UCLA 54 +13 63.5 30-28 W W U 242 4.4 100 5.6 0 137 2.7 269 12.2 110/16/14 at OREGON ST 41 -1.5 53.5 29-23 W W U 253 5.5 62 3.4 2 118 2.6 272 7.4 210/25/14 USC 55 -1.5 52 24-21 W W U 137 3.3 194 6.1 2 100 2.7 264 8.0 211/1/14 at ARIZONA ST 54 +6.5 56 16-19 L W U 184 3.5 57 2.6 0 239 5.6 205 6.2 211/8/14 OREGON 68 +9.5 61.5 27-51 L L O 120 3.4 320 9.7 4 269 5.4 239 8.2 111/15/14 at STANFORD 56 +10 41 20-17 W W U 70 2.2 177 6.3 0 190 5.0 104 3.7 111/22/14 ARIZONA 53 -5.5 53 10-42 L L U 213 5.0 171 4.9 4 298 6.3 222 10.1 111/29/14 at COLORADO 37 -7 52.5 38-34 W L O 128 3.7 311 8.4 0 116 3.6 317 10.2 1COLORADO ST 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/29/14 vs. COLORADO 37 +2.5 53.5 31-17 W W U 266 5.9 134 5.8 1 134 3.9 241 6.2 09/6/14 at BOISE ST 51 +8 54 24-37 L L O 28 1.2 434 7.5 3 324 5.8 352 10.7 19/13/14 CAL DAVIS 16 -20.5 55 49-21 W W O 224 6.8 452 13.3 0 179 5.4 200 5.9 09/27/14 at BOSTON COLLEGE 46 +6.5 56 24-21 W W U 162 6.8 268 6.5 2 239 4.9 169 9.4 110/4/14 TULSA 27 -18.5 63.5 42-17 W W U 234 7.5 298 11.5 2 127 2.8 263 7.5 310/11/14 at NEVADA 38 -2 64 31-24 W W U 119 3.5 326 9.1 1 160 4.4 297 5.9 110/18/14 UTAH ST 42 -5.5 54.5 16-13 W L U 75 1.9 243 7.6 0 100 5.3 160 5.2 110/25/14 WYOMING 27 -19.5 54.5 45-31 W L O 147 4.9 411 17.1 0 119 3.1 335 8.8 011/1/14 at SAN JOSE ST 27 -6 58 38-31 W W O 113 3.1 290 10.4 2 185 5.8 308 6.0 311/8/14 HAWAII 30 -20.5 57.5 49-22 W W O 293 6.8 287 10.3 1 141 3.9 211 4.3 311/22/14 NEW MEXICO 27 -20.5 65.5 58-20 W W O 292 6.5 406 11.3 2 301 7.5 55 5.0 411/28/14 at AIR FORCE 37 -7.5 62.5 24-27 L L U 106 3.3 366 8.0 1 242 3.8 135 9.0 1



(205) UTAH (-4 | 58.5) [SU:8-4 | ATS:8-4]

Head Coach: Kyle Whittingham • Conference: Pac-12

(206) COLORADO ST [SU:10-2 | ATS:8-4]Head Coach: Dave Baldwin • Conference: Mountain West


Utah -4.5 -4

Colorado St 58 58.5


19

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


19


SAM BOYD STADIUM (LAS VEGAS, NV)

RECENT LAS VEGAS BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/22/09 OREGON ST (P12) 20 BYU (MWC) 44 -2.5 58 BYU (MWC) BYU (MWC) DOG DOG OVER12/22/10 BOISE ST (WAC) 26 UTAH (MWC) 3 -16 58 BOISE ST (WAC) BOISE ST (WAC) FAV FAV UNDER12/22/11 BOISE ST (MWC) 56 ARIZONA ST (P12) 24 -14 65 BOISE ST (MWC) BOISE ST (MWC) FAV FAV OVER12/22/12 BOISE ST (MWC) 28 WASHINGTON (P12) 26 -4 44 BOISE ST (MWC) WASHINGTON (P12) FAV DOG OVER12/21/13 USC (P12) 45 FRESNO ST (MWC) 20 -4.5 65.5 USC (P12) USC (P12) FAV FAV UNDER

• UTAH is 8-2 ATS(S2000) at NEUTRAL SITE - In Bowl Games• COLORADO ST is 14-7 UNDER(L5Y) - Against good teams with 60%+ winning pct(CS)• UTAH is 10-1 UNDER(L3Y) - Against decent offensive teams averaging more than 5.7 yards per

play(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?205 UTAH -4 46 29.5 28.3 31.0 206 COLORADO ST 58.5 44 1.8 25.2 31.5 CST 24.7

RECENT UTAH BOWL GAME LOG RECENT COLORADO ST BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/20/07 NAVY (Poinsetta) 35-32 W -8.5 L 63.5O 12/31/02 TCU (Liberty) 3-17 L -3 L 48.5U1/2/09 ALABAMA (Sugar) 31-17 W 9.5 W 46.5O 12/31/03 BOSTON COLLEGE (San Francisco) 21-35 L 2 L 52.5O12/23/09 CALIFORNIA (Poinsetta) 37-27 W 2.5 W 52.5O 12/22/05 NAVY (Poinsetta) 30-51 L 3 L 59O12/22/10 BOISE ST (Las Vegas) 3-26 L 16 L 58U 12/20/08 FRESNO ST (New Mexico) 40-35 W 1.5 W 61O12/31/11 GEORGIA TECH (Sun) 30-27 W 1.5 W 49O 12/21/13 WASHINGTON ST (New Mexico) 48-45 W 4 W 64O

RECENT UTAH BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT COLORADO ST BOWL GAME TRENDS* Since '92, UTAH is 11-4 ATS in bowl games * COLORADO ST has won back-to-back bowl games, scoring 44 PPG* Four of L5 UTAH bowl games have gone OVER the total * OVER the total has converted in four straight CSU bowl games* UNDERDOGS have gone 4-1 ATS in L5 UTAH bowl games * RAMS beat Pac 12 rep Washington State in 2013 bowl game, 48-45

These former Mountain West Conference rivals renew their series in the Las Vegas Bowl. Their last matchup (2010) was a Utes’ blowout --59-6 as 30.5-point home favorites. The Utes have won five in a row SU (4-1 ATS), including two other decisive wins since the Rams’ last SU win -- 21-17 in 2005 as 4-point home favorites. Favorites are on a 5-1-1 ATS run.

The 2014 Las Vegas Bowl game invites Colorado State for the first time, and Utah for the third time since ‘99. The Utes’ familiarity with the sights and sounds of Sin City could be an advantage as they are 2-1 in their three prior appearances in this game. The matchup pits the usual combatant conferences, the Mountain West and Pac 12. The year 2010 was the only one in the last 13 games that offered a different matchup. In that time, the ATS ledger is split 6/6 between the two leagues while the MWC holds a 7-5 outright edge. Favorites are 8-1 SU in the L9 but just 5-4 ATS, meaning don’t be too presumptuous that if Colorado State wins it will do so handily.

Steve Makinen says: many of you probably will not have heard the name Garrett Grayson that much before starting your handicapping preparation for this Las Vegas Bowl game. That’s OK, as he has been somewhat inconspicuous playing in Fort Collins for Colorado State. Believe me though, you will know him better if you choose to back the Rams in this bowl contest against Utah. Grayson had a solid junior season a year ago but exploded this season and is being looked at closely now by NFL scouts after throwing for 32 TD’s and leading his team to a 10-2 mark. On the other sideline, I have to question the motivation of a Utah team that has been at best inconsistent. The Pac 12 rarely plays well in this game.

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Saturday, December 20, 2014 - (205) UTAH vs. (206) COLORADO ST (+4)Utah Utah Utah Colorado St* Colorado St Utah Utah Utah

Saturday, December 20, 2014 - (205) UTAH vs. (206) COLORADO ST - TOTAL (58.5)UNDER* UNDER UNDER* OVER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


20




Western Michigan players could care less their might be a chill in the air in Boise. The Broncos had one of the great turnaround stories of the season, with an 8-4 record and 10 covers, coming off of a 1-11 campaign. Credit 34-year old head coach P. J. Fleck for changing the culture and his recruitment of freshmen RB Jarvion Franklin (1,525 yards rushing, 25 TD’s), who became the MAC Offensive Player of the Year. This was also a resurgent year for the Air Force coming off a 2-10 campaign in 2013. The Falcons did not suffer nearly as many injuries as last season and assembled two impressive home upsets of Boise State and Colorado State as underdogs. Air Force was led by quite a trio which took them to 9-3 (7-5 ATS) in RB Jacob Owens (now out with broken foot), WR Jalen Robinette and dual-threat QB Kale Pearson.

FAMOUS IDAHO POTATO BOWL • 5:45 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 20, 2014

W MICHIGAN 34.6 21 40-180 [4.5] 28-19-263 [9.5] 12.8 23.8 19 34-146 [4.3] 33-18-228 [6.8] 15.7 +2 +10.8 AIR FORCE 30.9 22 61-272 [4.5] 16-9-151 [9.3] 13.7 24.2 19 36-142 [3.9] 33-18-256 [7.8] 16.4 +1 +6.7

W MICHIGAN 33.9 19 38-187 [4.9] 26-17-226 [8.6] 12.2 27.6 21 34-145 [4.3] 37-20-226 [6.1] 13.4 +2 +6.3 AIR FORCE 27.0 22 58-231 [4.0] 20-12-193 [9.5] 15.7 24.3 17 32-99 [3.1] 33-19-281 [8.5] 15.6 -8 +2.7

W MICHIGAN 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 at PURDUE 33 +7 49.5 34-43 L L O 213 6.7 243 5.9 1 226 5.8 181 4.8 09/13/14 at IDAHO 17 +3 57.5 45-33 W W O 266 5.8 218 16.8 0 45 1.5 362 8.8 19/20/14 MURRAY ST 12 -13 71.5 45-14 W W U 377 7.0 228 7.9 1 91 3.8 214 6.1 09/27/14 at VIRGINIA TECH 43 +20.5 50 17-35 L W O 19 0.8 212 6.4 2 308 6.6 178 5.6 210/4/14 TOLEDO 39 +5 61.5 19-20 L W U 62 1.9 388 10.2 0 274 7.6 210 7.8 310/11/14 at BALL ST 30 +1 52.5 42-38 W W O 208 6.9 290 10.0 2 145 3.7 326 7.4 010/18/14 at BOWLING GREEN 29 +3 68 26-14 W W U 195 3.9 166 6.9 0 135 4.4 139 4.2 210/25/14 OHIO U 29 -8 53 42-21 W W O 186 4.4 344 12.3 3 88 2.4 284 7.9 211/1/14 at MIAMI OHIO 23 -7 55 41-10 W W U 282 6.0 217 9.4 1 87 3.0 149 5.1 211/15/14 E MICHIGAN 11 -27.5 56 51-7 W W O 137 3.3 360 18.0 0 92 2.5 283 12.9 311/22/14 at C MICHIGAN 34 +1.5 51.5 32-20 W W O 129 3.5 233 11.1 3 70 3.0 248 5.6 411/28/14 N ILLINOIS 40 -8 58.5 21-31 L L U 91 2.1 256 7.8 6 196 5.8 159 8.0 2AIR FORCE 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 NICHOLLS ST -9 -27 69.5 44-16 W W U 539 7.4 19 3.2 0 63 2.1 200 6.5 09/6/14 at WYOMING 27 0 51 13-17 L L U 151 2.9 226 7.1 2 51 2.0 282 7.6 09/13/14 at GEORGIA ST 13 -12 63 48-38 W L O 315 4.8 224 14.9 0 135 5.4 414 9.9 19/27/14 BOISE ST 51 +13 57 28-14 W W U 287 4.8 48 4.0 2 97 3.3 370 6.4 710/4/14 NAVY 40 +3.5 56 30-21 W W U 198 4.1 166 9.8 0 251 4.6 142 8.9 210/11/14 at UTAH ST 42 +6.5 50 16-34 L L U 155 3.0 224 7.7 4 77 2.8 311 10.0 110/18/14 NEW MEXICO 27 -7 56.5 35-31 W L O 269 3.6 159 17.7 1 367 7.1 33 3.3 211/1/14 at ARMY 26 -3 54 23-6 W W U 242 3.9 141 11.8 1 122 3.2 47 3.6 111/8/14 at UNLV 22 -4.5 57 48-21 W W O 386 4.9 156 22.3 1 33 1.1 306 6.8 011/15/14 NEVADA 38 -3 53 45-38 W W O 342 5.3 129 8.6 0 223 5.0 275 7.6 111/21/14 at SAN DIEGO ST 40 +6 49 14-30 L L U 140 3.4 189 7.0 4 176 4.0 326 10.5 111/28/14 COLORADO ST 44 +7.5 62.5 27-24 W W U 242 3.8 135 9.0 1 106 3.3 366 8.0 1



(207) W MICHIGAN (-1 | 56.5) [SU:8-4 | ATS:10-2]

Head Coach: P. J. Fleck • Conference: MAC

(208) AIR FORCE [SU:9-3 | ATS:7-5]Head Coach: Troy Calhoun • Mountain West


W Michigan -1.5 -1

Air Force 58 56.5


21

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


21


ALBERTSONS STADIUM (BOISE, ID)

• W MICHIGAN is 9-1 ATS(CS) - Against tough-luck defenses allowing less than 16.7 yards per point(CS)

• AIR FORCE is 6-14 ATS(L3Y) - Against decent rushing teams averaging more than 4.4 yards per carry(CS)

• W MICHIGAN is 8-2 OVER(L2Y) - Against tough-luck defenses allowing less than 16.7 yards per point(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?207 W MICHIGAN -1 37 29.0 30.1 29.4 208 AIR FORCE 56.5 37 0.3 25.8 24.8 30.2

RECENT W MICHIGAN BOWL GAME LOG RECENT AIR FORCE BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/9/61 NEW MEXICO (Aviation) 12-28 L - - - 12/31/08 HOUSTON (Armed Forces) 28-34 L 5.5 L 65U12/10/88 FRESNO ST (Cal Raisin) 30-35 L - - - 12/31/09 HOUSTON (Armed Forces) 47-20 W 4.5 W 65.5O1/6/07 CINCINNATI (International) 24-27 L 7 W 42O 12/27/10 GEORGIA TECH (Independence) 14-7 W -3 W 55U12/30/08 RICE (Texas) 14-38 L 2 L 73.5U 12/28/11 TOLEDO (Military) 41-42 L 3 W 68.5O12/27/11 PURDUE (Little Caesars) 32-37 L 1.5 L 62.5O 12/29/12 RICE (Armed Forces) 14-33 L 1 L 61U

RECENT W MICHIGAN BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT AIR FORCE BOWL GAME TRENDS* W MICHIGAN is winless in six prior bowl games * AIR FORCE is 3-1 ATS in its L4 bowl games* BRONCOS have never been favored in a bowl game * FAVORITES are 9-1 SU & 7-3 ATS in L10 AIR FORCE bowl games* Two of prior three WMU totaled bowl games went OVER * FALCONS lost SU won won ATS in 2011 bowl game vs MAC foe

The Broncos and Falcons are matched up for the first time in Boise’s Famous Idaho Potato Bowl. The Falcons are no strangers to the blue turf as MWC members. Under 2nd-year coach P.J. Fleck, Western Michigan finished 8-4 after a 1-11 disaster in 2013, and will be in a bowl for the first time since 2011. Air Force is 2-4 in bowls under Troy Calhoun.

The Famous Idaho Potatoes Bowl from Boise, ID was for long known as the Humanitarian Bowl, and Boise’s picturesque setting and typically frigid weather await Western Michigan and Air Force. Of course, neither team will enjoy any significant weather advantage as both are used to winter weather in their respective locales. This is the second straight year that a Mountain West team squares off with one from the MAC. In last year’s game, warm weather San Diego State easily disposed of cold weather Buffalo, 49-24. MAC teams have been in this game the last five years and are 2-3 SU & ATS. Two of the games in that span closed with pick em’ pointspreads but otherwise, underdog teams are on a run of 3-3 SU & 4-2 ATS since 2006. OVER the total has converted in five of the L7.RECENT FAMOUS IDAHO POTATO BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/30/09 IDAHO (WAC) 43 BOWLING GREEN (MAC) 42 0 69 IDAHO (WAC) IDAHO (WAC) N/A N/A OVER12/18/10 N ILLINOIS (MAC) 40 FRESNO ST (WAC) 17 -1.5 56.5 N ILLINOIS (MAC) N ILLINOIS (MAC) FAV FAV OVER12/17/11 UTAH ST (WAC) 23 OHIO U (MAC) 24 0 62 OHIO U (MAC) OHIO U (MAC) N/A N/A UNDER12/15/12 UTAH ST (WAC) 41 TOLEDO (MAC) 15 -10 60.5 UTAH ST (WAC) UTAH ST (WAC) FAV FAV UNDER12/21/13 BUFFALO (MAC) 24 SAN DIEGO ST (MWC) 49 -1 50 SAN DIEGO ST (MWC) SAN DIEGO ST (MWC) DOG DOG OVER

Consensus says: This game was split rather closely amongst our human experts and strength ratings, and no one wanted to step out on the line and put their name to a Best Bet writeup. Western Michigan is the favorite, but only by a point over Air Force. The Falcons are the much more experienced bowl team, but the Broncos will be playing with the fire of a team that is in search of its first ever bowl win. Sometimes that motivation level difference can be the deciding factor. WMU was also a spread covering machine this season, going 10-2 ATS. Our consensus thus leans slightly with the Broncos and the OVER.

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Saturday, December 20, 2014 - (207) W MICHIGAN vs. (208) AIR FORCE (+1)W Michigan W Michigan Air Force W Michigan Air Force W Michigan Air Force W Michigan

Saturday, December 20, 2014 - (207) W MICHIGAN vs. (208) AIR FORCE - TOTAL (56.5)UNDER OVER OVER* OVER UNDER UNDER OVER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


22




In 2008, South Alabama did not have a football program and just six short years later and their third at the FBS level, the Jaguars are in a bowl game. Unless you are alumni of South Alabama, chances are you have never heard of QB Brandon Bridge. However, NFL scouts know him as Bridge has the prototypical quarterback build at 6-foot-5 and 235 pounds and he’s a very good athlete. His downside is accuracy (51.9 percent) which could be determining factor in the outcome. Bowling Green lost presumed All-MAC quarterback Matt Johnson in first contest of the year, yet kept their poise to win seven of the next nine and become MAC East titlists. Backup James Knapke exceeded all expectations, but lost his confidence late in the season and the Falcons are on a three-game losing skid. Typically, these squads are very good bets in bowls.

CAMELLIA BOWL • 9:15 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 20, 2014

S ALABAMA 22.1 21 42-183 [4.4] 31-16-190 [6.1] 16.9 25.8 20 41-191 [4.7] 29-16-200 [7.0] 15.2 -4 -3.7 BOWLING GREEN 29.8 22 39-177 [4.5] 39-22-253 [6.5] 14.4 33.9 26 41-207 [5.1] 42-26-292 [6.9] 14.7 +7 -4.1 S ALABAMA 22.5 20 41-160 [3.8] 29-16-204 [7.1] 16.2 24.2 20 37-153 [4.1] 33-18-215 [6.5] 15.2 0 -1.7 BOWLING GREEN 27.1 20 38-144 [3.8] 38-20-245 [6.5] 14.4 38.6 29 44-244 [5.5] 47-28-320 [6.8] 14.6 +8 -11.5

S ALABAMA 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO9/6/14 at KENT ST 25 -2 53.5 23-13 W W U 186 3.7 161 6.4 0 64 2.3 213 5.3 19/13/14 MISSISSIPPI ST 59 +14.5 54.5 3-35 L L U 57 2.1 288 5.2 4 288 6.4 226 9.4 29/20/14 GA SOUTHERN 37 +2 58 6-28 L L U 147 3.5 149 4.4 2 335 6.4 85 7.7 29/27/14 at IDAHO 17 -3 58 34-10 W W U 233 6.1 196 7.8 2 30 0.9 239 6.0 210/4/14 at APPALACHIAN ST 31 -4 52.5 47-21 W W O 243 5.3 339 12.1 0 203 5.3 191 5.3 310/18/14 GEORGIA ST 13 -19.5 56.5 30-27 W L O 321 5.9 126 3.9 0 90 2.4 311 7.8 110/24/14 TROY 19 -16.5 55 27-13 W L U 296 6.6 106 5.0 0 164 4.1 145 6.0 011/1/14 at LA LAFAYETTE 31 +7 57 9-19 L L U 66 1.9 270 7.7 1 196 5.0 216 7.7 111/8/14 at ARKANSAS ST 34 +11 52.5 10-45 L L O 111 3.1 90 3.6 4 214 4.4 186 5.5 011/15/14 TEXAS ST UNIV 30 -5.5 50 24-20 W L U 174 5.0 210 7.2 4 106 2.7 300 6.8 011/22/14 at SOUTH CAROLINA 50 +24 56.5 12-37 L L U 119 2.7 170 5.0 5 210 5.7 244 12.2 511/28/14 NAVY 40 +7.5 54.5 40-42 L W O 238 5.1 177 5.5 2 388 7.2 42 10.5 3BOWLING GREEN 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/29/14 at W KENTUCKY 38 -7 64 31-59 L L O 151 4.3 314 8.7 0 133 3.2 569 10.2 09/6/14 VMI 4 -38.5 63 48-7 W W U 260 7.0 266 7.8 2 97 2.8 321 5.8 39/13/14 INDIANA 34 +7.5 75.5 45-42 W W O 176 4.4 395 5.4 2 235 6.4 347 8.5 19/20/14 at WISCONSIN 56 +27 62.5 17-68 L L O 93 3.2 178 5.4 2 644 10.7 112 6.2 39/27/14 at MASSACHUSETTS 23 -5.5 70 47-42 W L O 225 4.7 443 7.4 3 49 1.6 589 9.7 410/4/14 BUFFALO 30 -3 75 36-35 W L U 187 5.1 321 8.2 3 234 5.0 134 5.6 110/11/14 at OHIO U 29 -1 65 31-13 W W U 95 3.5 260 6.7 1 127 2.8 386 6.0 210/18/14 W MICHIGAN 37 -3 68 14-26 L L U 135 4.4 139 4.2 2 195 3.9 166 6.9 011/4/14 at AKRON 29 +3.5 59.5 27-10 W W U 219 4.3 170 5.0 1 94 3.5 304 4.8 511/12/14 KENT ST 25 -14 54.5 30-20 W L U 212 3.6 315 8.5 2 22 1.6 306 6.5 511/19/14 at TOLEDO 39 +7 59 20-27 L T U 104 2.7 187 5.1 0 325 6.1 63 3.2 311/28/14 BALL ST 30 -10 58 24-41 L L O 314 8.1 140 5.2 0 199 5.1 286 9.9 012/5/14 vs. N ILLINOIS 40 +5 63.5 17-51 L L O 124 3.5 163 6.5 4 334 6.5 218 4.4 2



(209) S ALABAMA (-2.5 | 54) [SU:6-6 | ATS:4-8]

Head Coach: Joey Jones • Conference: Sun Belt

(210) BOWLING GREEN [SU:7-6 | ATS:4-8-1]Head Coach: Dino Babers • Conference: MAC


S Alabama 55 -2.5

Bolwing Green -1 54


23

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


23


CRAMTON BOWL (MONTGOMERY, AL)

• BOWLING GREEN is 8-2 ATS(L2Y) - Against inefficient offenses averaging more than 15.3 yards per point(CS)

• S ALABAMA is 4-8 ATS(CS) - All Games• BOWLING GREEN is 8-1-1 UNDER(L3Y) - Against poor rushing defenses yielding more than 4.6

yards per carry(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?209 S ALABAMA -2.5 28 26.7 31.1 OVER 25.7 210 BOWLING GREEN 54 29 -1 25.7 30.9 31.6 BGSU

RECENT S ALABAMA BOWL GAME LOG RECENT BOWLING GREEN BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

* SOUTH ALABAMA is PLAYING IN ITS FIRST EVER BOWL GAME 12/22/04 MEMPHIS (Godaddy) 52-35 W -3 W 66O1/6/08 TULSA (Godaddy) 7-63 L 6 L 76U12/30/09 IDAHO (Humanitarian) 42-43 L 0 L 69O12/27/12 SAN JOSE ST (Military) 20-29 L 7 L 46O12/26/13 PITTSBURGH (Little Caesars) 27-30 L -6.5 L 50O

RECENT BOWLING GREEN BOWL GAME TRENDS* BOWLING GREEN is 0-4 SU & ATS in L4 bowl appearances* The L3 BGSU bowl games went OVER the total* FAVORITES are on a 3-1 SU & ATS run in BGSU bowl games

The Jaguars will have home-state advantage in the new Raycom Media Camellia Bowl in Montgomery. This will be the first bowl appearance in the program’s three-year existence under Joey Jones. The Falcons reached the MAC Championship game in Dino Babers’ first season. They have lost their last four bowl games, and last won one in 2004 -- 52-35 over Memphis in the GoDaddy.com Bowl.

The first annual Camellia Bowl will be played in the Cramton Bowl, the home stadium for the Faulkner University Eagles, as well as the Montgomery area’s four high schools. It is clearly the smallest of the facilities hosting bowl games. This contest will also mark the first bowl game for South Alabama, whose university is some 2-1/2 hours away in Mobile, AL. Bowling Green is well-familiar with bowl appearances, ending their third straight season with such distinction. However, the Falcons have lost four straight bowl games overall, and haven’t won one since 2006. They are an underdog here, despite the fact that the Jaguars are finishing just their third seasons of FBS football.RECENT CAMELLIA BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U* This marks the inaugural game in the CAMELLIA Bowl series

Jim says: South Alabama may be playing somewhat close to home in the Camellia Bowl, and in its first ever bowl game, but I have to question the virtue of putting a 6-6 team in a bowl game that is in just its third year of FBS football. On top of that, for whatever reason, the Jaguars are favored to win. How insulted could Bowling Green be? The Falcons at least took on some pretty good teams this season and actually beat a member of the Big Ten in Indiana. Their high tempo offense is going to be a challenge for South Alabama, whose best win was over…Texas State? Come on, Bowling Green is the better team here and won’t be intimidated by the high school-like environment at the Cramton Bowl. Falcons soar.

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Saturday, December 20, 2014 - (209) S ALABAMA vs. (210) BOWLING GREEN (+2.5)Bowling Green* S Alabama Bowling Green Bowling Green* Bowling Green Bowling Green Bowling Green Bowling Green

Saturday, December 20, 2014 - (209) S ALABAMA vs. (210) BOWLING GREEN - TOTAL (54)OVER UNDER OVER OVER OVER UNDER OVER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


24




This is the inaugural Miami Beach Bowl and while this contest might not draw a huge national buzz, it is a solid matchup. BYU started off 4-0, with three wins over Power 5 teams. Then QB Tayson Hill was hurt which dramatically changed the Cougars fortunes and they lost four in a row, mostly because of making frequent turnovers. At that point the schedule got softer, the offense settled down and BYU finish 4-0 with three covers. Even with losing Hill, the Cougars averaged over 36 PPG and was 25th in total offense. Kudos to coach Justin Fuentes who took a Memphis team which was 3-9 a season to 9-3 (7-5 ATS) and AAC co-champions. The foundation of the Tigers is defense, as they held opposing teams to only 17.1 PPG and the emergence of sophomore QB Paxton Lynch helped take the Memphis program to this new level.

MIAMI BEACH BOWL • 2:00 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 22, 2014

BYU 36.2 25 44-190 [4.4] 36-22-272 [7.6] 12.8 25.2 21 36-118 [3.3] 42-24-267 [6.4] 15.3 -2 +11.0 MEMPHIS 34.7 22 45-192 [4.2] 31-20-231 [7.4] 12.2 17.1 19 35-127 [3.6] 37-20-217 [5.9] 20.1 +12 +17.6 BYU 33.2 24 41-157 [3.8] 37-24-275 [7.5] 13.0 24.2 23 37-121 [3.2] 42-25-285 [6.7] 16.8 +4 +9.0 MEMPHIS 30.2 21 45-159 [3.5] 30-19-243 [8.2] 13.3 18.3 21 35-146 [4.2] 40-21-226 [5.6] 20.3 +10 +11.9

BYU 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/29/14 at CONNECTICUT 23 -15.5 54.5 35-10 W W U 205 5.5 308 8.6 2 71 2.3 284 5.9 29/6/14 at TEXAS 49 +1 47.5 41-7 W W O 248 4.2 181 6.7 2 82 2.3 176 5.7 49/11/14 HOUSTON 41 -17 63 33-25 W L U 323 5.2 200 5.9 3 10 0.8 315 5.9 09/20/14 VIRGINIA 46 -16 49 41-33 W L O 145 3.9 187 8.1 0 192 4.4 327 5.6 210/3/14 UTAH ST 42 -21 53 20-35 L L O 154 4.5 271 6.8 4 136 3.0 321 12.8 110/9/14 at UCF 45 +2.5 46 24-31 L L O 189 3.9 153 4.1 2 63 1.9 326 6.3 410/18/14 NEVADA 38 -10 58.5 35-42 L L O 193 4.9 408 6.5 3 126 3.5 285 7.1 010/24/14 at BOISE ST 51 +6.5 58 30-55 L L O 63 2.4 259 6.8 2 227 4.7 410 13.2 111/1/14 at MIDDLE TENN ST 29 -3.5 63 27-7 W W U 128 3.3 316 7.0 0 109 2.9 119 3.7 211/15/14 UNLV 22 -26 63 42-23 W L O 267 6.5 325 10.2 2 199 4.4 204 4.5 111/22/14 SAVANNAH ST -13 -59 74 64-0 W W U 264 4.3 223 11.7 1 23 1.0 40 1.4 311/29/14 at CALIFORNIA 41 +3 71.5 42-35 W W O 107 2.7 433 11.4 2 173 4.2 393 6.6 1MEMPHIS 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 AUSTIN PEAY -6 -39.5 42.5 63-0 W W O 303 5.5 242 9.0 2 116 3.4 30 1.9 29/6/14 at UCLA 54 +22 57 35-42 L W O 164 4.2 305 7.3 0 144 3.5 396 9.0 19/20/14 MIDDLE TENN ST 29 -12 60.5 36-17 W W U 261 5.1 219 6.3 1 88 2.6 237 6.8 39/27/14 at OLE MISS 58 +20.5 58 3-24 L L U 23 0.7 81 2.6 2 178 4.2 248 6.7 410/4/14 vs. CINCINNATI 47 +3 62.5 41-14 W W U 299 4.3 311 12.4 0 97 3.9 255 6.4 210/11/14 HOUSTON 41 -7 48 24-28 L L O 125 3.0 243 6.6 5 186 4.3 168 6.7 310/25/14 at SMU 18 -21.5 51.5 48-10 W W O 230 4.3 352 13.0 1 137 4.4 114 3.5 210/31/14 TULSA 27 -24.5 57 40-20 W L O 243 5.9 183 5.9 1 62 1.8 349 6.5 011/7/14 at TEMPLE 37 -7.5 48 16-13 W L U 82 2.1 230 8.2 1 164 5.3 145 3.7 211/15/14 at TULANE 29 -7.5 48.5 38-7 W W U 156 3.9 178 7.1 2 155 4.0 196 4.1 511/22/14 SOUTH FLORIDA 29 -19.5 46 31-20 W L O 238 6.1 232 10.1 0 95 2.7 301 6.5 111/29/14 CONNECTICUT 23 -23.5 45 41-10 W W O 178 4.0 194 4.7 0 107 3.0 162 6.0 2



(211) BYU [SU:8-4 | ATS:4-7]

Head Coach: Bronco Mendenhall • Conference: Independent

(212) MEMPHIS (-1 | 58) [SU:9-3 | ATS:7-5]Head Coach: Justin Fuente • Conference: The American


BYU 56.5 58

Memphis PK -1


25

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


25


MARLINS PARK (MIAMI, FL)

• MEMPHIS is 9-3 ATS(L5Y) - Non-conference VS NON-BIG 5• BYU is 6-11 ATS(L3Y) - Against efficient defenses allowing more than 15.7 yards per point(CS)• MEMPHIS is 9-1 UNDER(L2Y) - Against high-scoring teams averaging 32 PPG or more(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?211 BYU 58 44 26.7 30.6 29.8 BYU212 MEMPHIS -1 47 -3.3 31.9 29.3 25.7

RECENT BYU BOWL GAME LOG RECENT MEMPHIS BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/22/09 OREGON ST (Las Vegas) 44-20 W 2.5 W 58O 12/16/03 NORTH TEXAS (New Orleans) 27-17 W -3 W 46.5U12/18/10 UTEP (New Mexico) 52-24 W -11 W 51O 12/22/04 BOWLING GREEN (Godaddy) 35-52 L 3 L 66O12/30/11 TULSA (Armed Forces) 24-21 W 2.5 W 59.5U 12/26/05 AKRON (Motor City) 38-31 W -4.5 W 50O12/20/12 SAN DIEGO ST (Poinsetta) 23-6 W -3 W 46U 12/21/07 FLA ATLANTIC (New Orleans) 27-44 L 3.5 L 67.5O12/27/13 WASHINGTON (San Francisco) 16-31 L 6 L 65.5U 12/20/08 SOUTH FLORIDA (St Peterburg) 14-41 L 10.5 L 56.5U

RECENT BYU BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT MEMPHIS BOWL GAME TRENDS* BYU's 2013 bowl game loss snapped 4-game SU & ATS win streak * FAVORITES are a perfect 5-0 SU & ATS in L5 MEMPHIS bowl games* The L3 BYU bowl games went UNDER the total * MEMPHIS hasn't won a bowl game since '05, going 0-2 SU & ATS since* FAVORITES are 10-2 SU & 8-4 ATS in BYU bowl games since '98 * Three of L4 MEMPHIS bowl games went OVER the total

The Cougars and Tigers are matched for the first time in the inaugural Miami Beach Bowl, to be played in Giancarlo Stanton’s stomping grounds (aka Marlins Park). This will be the 10th consecutive bowl appearance (and fifth different bowl in five years) for BYU under Bronco Mendenhall. They are on a 6-3 SU run. The Tigers finished 9-3 after 3-9 and 4-8 seasons under Justin Fuente.

Beautiful and relatively new Marlins Park in Miami hosts a new bowl series for 2014, the Miami Beach Bowl. The area has been and continues to be host to many bowl games series’, but this one will certainly take on a little different flavor, being played at the retractable roof stadium built for baseball. The matchup is one of the better one’s of the pre-Christmas games as American Athletic champion Memphis takes on BYU. The Tigers are a slight favorite as they look for a first bowl game victory since 2005. Contrast that to the Cougars, who have won six bowl games since then.

Steve Makinen says: Sometimes when handicapping a bowl game, especially on totals, I simply look at some of the obvious factors and make a deduction. In the Miami Beach Bowl, BYU, a team that averages a lofty 160 plays per game on offense and defense, takes on a Memphis team that is an above average team in terms of tempo. Defensive coordinators usually have their hands full when preparing for high tempo attacks as it is, and that gets even more difficult in bowl games when offensive coaches have the time to throw in new wrinkles. Both of these offenses are potent, with a combined scoring average of over 70 PPG. On top of all that, this total is only 58, not 68 or so. With no weather concerns to worry about, I look for a shootout.

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Monday, December 22, 2014 - (211) BYU vs. (212) MEMPHIS (-1)BYU Memphis BYU BYU Memphis Memphis BYU BYU

Monday, December 22, 2014 - (211) BYU vs. (212) MEMPHIS - TOTAL (58)OVER OVER UNDER* OVER* UNDER OVER UNDER OVER

RECENT MIAMI BEACH BOWL GAMESDATE* This marks the inaugural game in the MIAMI BEACH Bowl series



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


26




support the MAC champions Northern Illinois, who has covered three straight and looks to be peaking or is 12-1 Marshall, the winners of Conference USA, the play after three spread losses? The Thundering Herd has been established as double digit favorites but what has hampered them is 12 turnovers in their last four outings and the Huskies have forced 17 miscues in their past five contests. QB Rakeem Cato is the catalyst of Marshall’s offense but coach Doc Holliday knows his team is more effective if RB Devon Johnson is running and hopes he can overcome shoulder woes. Northern Illinois was 7-1 and 6-2 ATS away from home and will attempt to disrupt the fiery Cato who sometimes lets his emotions overtake him and his play suffers. One of three bowls involving two conference champions.

BOCA RATON BOWL • 6:00 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 23, 2014

N ILLINOIS 32.2 23 49-253 [5.2] 27-16-190 [6.9] 13.8 23.6 21 39-158 [4.1] 32-18-224 [7.0] 16.2 +12 +8.6 MARSHALL 45.1 26 40-276 [6.9] 34-20-288 [8.6] 12.5 20.8 21 42-157 [3.8] 34-18-195 [5.8] 16.9 -3 +24.3 N ILLINOIS 31.4 22 48-239 [4.9] 28-16-176 [6.3] 13.2 23.9 21 39-149 [3.9] 33-19-224 [6.7] 15.6 +11 +7.5 MARSHALL 46.2 24 38-270 [7.1] 30-18-237 [7.8] 11.0 17.7 22 44-160 [3.6] 34-17-186 [5.5] 19.5 +3 +28.5

N ILLINOIS 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/28/14 PRESBYTERIAN 14 -40 60 55-3 W W U 424 5.5 211 6.6 0 69 2.2 58 3.2 39/6/14 at NORTHWESTERN 40 +7 59 23-15 W W U 221 4.0 180 7.8 0 72 1.9 322 7.5 19/13/14 at UNLV 22 -9.5 62.5 48-34 W W O 331 4.8 285 10.2 1 102 3.2 397 9.5 19/20/14 at ARKANSAS 57 +13.5 64.5 14-52 L L O 123 3.8 180 5.8 1 212 4.7 215 9.3 010/4/14 KENT ST 25 -25 58.5 17-14 W L U 181 4.6 198 7.9 1 83 2.2 244 6.4 010/11/14 C MICHIGAN 34 -8 57 17-34 L L U 110 3.3 231 7.0 1 283 6.2 269 8.7 110/18/14 MIAMI OHIO 23 -13.5 58 51-41 W L O 433 7.9 225 10.2 1 168 5.6 346 8.2 010/25/14 at E MICHIGAN 11 -18 62.5 28-17 W L U 332 7.5 54 3.2 0 257 5.4 124 3.6 111/5/14 at BALL ST 30 -3 62.5 35-21 W W U 236 3.8 149 4.8 2 133 4.3 174 4.5 511/11/14 TOLEDO 39 -3.5 61.5 27-24 W L U 226 4.9 190 8.6 0 263 5.4 209 9.1 011/18/14 at OHIO U 29 +1 52.5 21-14 W W U 141 3.4 184 7.7 1 203 5.2 141 5.0 211/28/14 at W MICHIGAN 37 +8 58.5 31-21 W W U 196 5.8 159 8.0 2 91 2.1 256 7.8 612/5/14 vs. BOWLING GREEN 29 -5 63.5 51-17 W W O 334 6.5 218 4.4 2 124 3.5 163 6.5 4MARSHALL 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 at MIAMI OHIO 23 -24.5 64 42-27 W L O 171 4.8 261 8.2 1 100 2.8 318 6.5 19/6/14 RHODE ISLAND 5 -41 62.5 48-7 W T U 432 9.4 292 8.3 3 64 1.6 111 4.0 29/13/14 OHIO U 29 -20 58 44-14 W W U 257 5.6 448 13.6 1 141 4.4 236 6.2 29/20/14 at AKRON 29 -10 59.5 48-17 W W O 284 7.5 242 6.4 1 92 4.0 251 4.8 410/4/14 at OLD DOMINION 27 -19 73.5 56-14 W W U 354 7.1 237 8.8 3 201 4.8 85 3.4 110/11/14 MIDDLE TENN ST 29 -23 68 49-24 W W O 252 4.8 337 10.2 2 169 4.6 201 5.4 210/18/14 at FLA INTERNATIONAL 27 -21 56.5 45-13 W W O 243 9.3 214 7.9 1 177 3.3 208 6.5 210/25/14 FLA ATLANTIC 26 -26.5 65.5 35-16 W L U 328 9.4 218 9.1 0 209 3.9 179 4.8 011/8/14 at SOUTHERN MISS 23 -26 64 63-17 W W O 335 8.8 186 9.8 1 186 3.4 114 5.7 311/15/14 RICE 33 -20.5 65.5 41-14 W W U 284 6.5 297 8.0 2 81 2.3 99 4.3 011/22/14 at UAB 33 -17.5 69 23-18 W L U 231 5.9 284 7.3 2 205 3.7 141 5.4 111/28/14 W KENTUCKY 38 -23.5 76.5 66-67 L L O 291 8.1 417 9.1 4 222 6.3 516 10.1 212/6/14 LOUISIANA TECH 45 -8.5 67 26-23 W L U 121 3.5 308 6.7 4 196 4.4 72 3.6 2



(213) N ILL INOIS [SU:11-2 | ATS:7-6]

Head Coach: Rod Carey • Conference: MAC

(214) MARSHALL (-10.5 | 65) [SU:12-1 | ATS:7-5-1]Head Coach: Doc Holliday • Conference: C-USA


N Illinois 61.5 65

Marshall -11 -10.5


27

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


27


FAU FOOTBALL STADIUM (BOCCA RATON, FL)

• MARSHALL is 6-1 ATS(S2000) - In December Bowl Games• N ILLINOIS is 3-7 ATS(L5Y) - Against elite offensive teams averaging more than 6.3 yards per

play(CS)• MARSHALL is 7-2-1 OVER(L3Y) - Against decent teams outscoring opponents by more than 7

points per game(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?213 N ILLINOIS 65 40 24.0 26.2 23.7 214 MARSHALL -10.5 49 -8.8 37.1 38.6 40.6 MAR

RECENT N ILLINOIS BOWL GAME LOG RECENT MARSHALL BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

1/2/10 SOUTH FLORIDA (International) 3-27 L 6.5 L 50U 12/18/02 LOUISVILLE (Godaddy) 38-15 W -2 W 63U12/18/10 FRESNO ST (Humanitarian) 40-17 W -1.5 W 56.5O 12/23/04 CINCINNATI (Armed Forces) 14-32 L 2 L 54U1/8/12 ARKANSAS ST (Godaddy) 38-20 W 1.5 W 66U 12/26/09 OHIO U (Motor City) 21-17 W 3 W 49U1/1/13 FLORIDA ST (Orange) 10-31 L 14.5 L 58U 12/20/11 FLA INTERNATIONAL (St Peterburg) 20-10 W 4 W 48.5U12/26/13 UTAH ST (Poinsettia) 14-21 L 2.5 L 55.5U 12/27/13 MARYLAND (Military) 31-20 W -2.5 W 64U

RECENT N ILLINOIS BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT MARSHALL BOWL GAME TRENDS* N ILLINOIS is 0-2 ATS as double-digit bowl dog, outscored 68-17 * MARSHALL is on impressive 8-1 SU & ATS bowl game run* Six of L7 NIU bowl games have gone UNDER the total * Seven of the L8 HERD bowl games went UNDER the total* FAVORITES are on a run of 6-1 SU & ATS in NIU bowl games * MARSHALL is 3-0 SU & ATS as bowl game favorite, avg win 17.3 PPG

The inaugural Boca Raton Bowl in Florida Atlantic University’s stadium got this intriguing matchup. Marshall won the only previous meeting, 37-15 in a pick-em game in DeKalb in 2001. The game stayed under a 58 total. After their 12-1 season, the Thundering Herd will try to run Doc Holliday’s bowl record to 3-0. The Huskies are a bowl staple of late, making their seventh consecutive appearance.

As if all the bowl games already played in the state of Florida weren’t enough, the Miami Beach and Boca Raton Bowls join the ranks. Hey, it’s not like fans don’t enjoy traveling to the Miami area at this time of year. In any case, this game is the 2nd lowest paid bowl game, only in front of the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl in Boise, ID. The teams will certainly not take that into consideration in putting forth their efforts, although the payout could be considered a slap in the face for a Marshall team that was 1-point away from going undefeated. The Herd’s opponent…an 11-2 Northern Illinois team that won the MAC conference. In truth, this matchup is worthy of a New Year’s Day game, just without the hype. Fans at FAU Stadium should be in for treat.

Steve Makinen says: Rakeem Cato is a major star at quarterback for Marshall, probably comparable or better than past greats like Byron Leftwich and Chad Pennington at the school. Had his team not lost to Western Kentucky by a single point (67-66 mind you), Cato would have been showing his stuff off in front of the folks at the Fiesta Bowl in all likelihood. Now that game was certainly not his fault, as when you score 66 points, you should win. However, the Herd struggled with turnovers in that one, and the season finale, as they gave it away 8 times in the two games. That will be cleaned up in time of Northern Illinois in Boca Raton. I also can’t overlook Conference USA’s dominance over the MAC in bowl games. Cato stars and wins.

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Tuesday, December 23, 2014 - (213) N ILLINOIS vs. (214) MARSHALL (-10.5)Marshall N Illinois Marshall Marshall* N Illinois Marshall Marshall Marshall

Tuesday, December 23, 2014 - (213) N ILLINOIS vs. (214) MARSHALL - TOTAL (65)OVER OVER OVER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER

RECENT BOCA RATON BOWL GAMESDATE* This marks the inaugural game in the BOCA RATON Bowl series



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


28




San Diego State will have a home bowl contest for the third time in five years playing in this very same contest. It will be a rematch of the 2010 encounter with Navy and the Aztecs took that one 35-14 as three-point favorites. With San Diego being a port destination, the Midshipmen will have fans in the stands despite the travel distance. Junior QB Keenan Reynolds is not only a great field general, but an exceptional athlete, who directs the nation’s top rushing team. The Middies are a solid 6-4 ATS in last 10 bowl appearances. San Diego State is one of only three teams with a winning record to have each of its victories by 10 or more points, thus when the Aztecs were good, they were very good. S.D. State’s defense held opposing teams to only 20.1 PPG with their confusing 3-3-5 scheme, which makes this a fun matchup.

POINSETTIA BOWL • 9:30 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 23, 2014

NAVY 33.1 21 56-345 [6.2] 10-5-87 [8.5] 13.0 28.2 22 41-200 [4.9] 29-20-211 [7.2] 14.5 -3 +4.6 SAN DIEGO ST 25.8 19 40-219 [5.4] 27-14-181 [6.8] 15.5 20.1 18 39-147 [3.8] 29-16-192 [6.6] 16.9 +3 +5.7 NAVY 30.8 20 57-336 [5.9] 10-5-88 [8.8] 13.8 29.0 21 43-203 [4.7] 28-18-194 [7.0] 13.7 -4 -0.8 SAN DIEGO ST 19.0 17 36-194 [5.4] 29-15-163 [5.7] 18.8 27.5 19 41-165 [4.1] 28-16-181 [6.6] 12.6 -7 -8.5

NAVY 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 vs. OHIO ST 62 +13 54 17-34 L L U 370 5.9 20 5.0 1 194 4.9 226 15.1 19/6/14 at TEMPLE 37 -3 58 31-24 W W U 487 7.7 30 3.8 3 156 4.6 240 4.8 29/13/14 at TEXAS ST UNIV 30 -6 56 35-21 W W U 352 6.2 117 16.7 1 211 4.8 231 6.4 19/20/14 RUTGERS 38 -6 55.5 24-31 L L U 171 4.0 231 10.5 1 284 5.1 151 10.8 19/27/14 W KENTUCKY 38 -8 67.5 27-36 L L U 412 7.9 55 3.7 2 164 4.8 387 7.2 110/4/14 at AIR FORCE 37 -3.5 56 21-30 L L U 251 4.6 142 8.9 2 198 4.1 166 9.8 010/11/14 VMI 4 -38 61 51-14 W L O 350 7.1 82 13.7 2 60 2.0 202 5.1 110/25/14 SAN JOSE ST 27 -8.5 53.5 41-31 W W O 423 6.2 56 7.0 1 100 4.0 322 7.0 111/1/14 vs. NOTRE DAME 47 +14 54 39-49 L W O 336 5.6 118 6.9 1 218 5.6 315 12.6 111/15/14 GA SOUTHERN 37 -3 59.5 52-19 W W O 394 7.9 71 8.9 0 375 8.0 73 4.6 311/28/14 at S ALABAMA 28 -7.5 54.5 42-40 W L O 388 7.2 42 10.5 3 238 5.1 177 5.5 212/13/14 vs. ARMY 26 -16.5 56 17-10 W L U 198 4.4 37 5.3 1 208 3.9 77 9.6 1SAN DIEGO ST 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 N ARIZONA 19 -17 49.5 38-7 W W U 194 5.2 205 7.1 1 124 3.4 188 6.7 19/6/14 at NORTH CAROLINA 43 +14 59.5 27-31 L W U 168 4.8 341 8.7 3 131 4.0 263 8.5 19/20/14 at OREGON ST 41 +10.5 56.5 7-28 L L U 109 4.7 106 4.1 2 97 2.7 275 8.9 29/27/14 UNLV 22 -18 56 34-17 W L U 257 6.0 209 7.5 0 109 2.9 346 10.5 210/3/14 at FRESNO ST 35 +3 58.5 13-24 L L U 186 4.1 84 3.5 3 172 4.0 143 5.1 210/10/14 at NEW MEXICO 27 -3 53.5 24-14 W W U 397 8.6 73 4.3 4 152 4.0 111 4.6 110/18/14 HAWAII 30 -10 49 20-10 W T U 283 6.0 174 7.3 1 90 3.6 174 5.6 311/1/14 at NEVADA 38 +2 48.5 14-30 L L U 135 4.7 189 5.3 3 229 4.9 109 4.5 111/8/14 IDAHO 17 -20.5 57 35-21 W L U 156 4.0 249 11.3 0 193 3.9 186 5.6 111/15/14 at BOISE ST 51 +14 55.5 29-38 L W O 169 4.7 188 6.3 1 212 4.5 187 6.7 211/21/14 AIR FORCE 37 -6 49 30-14 W W U 176 4.0 326 10.5 1 140 3.4 189 7.0 411/29/14 SAN JOSE ST 27 -14 47 38-7 W W U 393 6.6 34 2.1 0 111 3.7 133 4.3 2



(215) NAVY [SU:7-5 | ATS:5-7]

Head Coach: Ken Niumatalolo • Conference: Independent

(216) SAN DIEGO ST (-2.5 | 54) [SU:7-5 | ATS:6-5-1]Head Coach: Rocky Long • Conference: Mountain West


Navy 55.5 54

San Diego St -1.5 -2.5


29

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


29


QUALCOMM STADIUM (SAN DIEGO, CA)

• NAVY is 7-3 ATS(L3Y) - Against elite rushing teams averaging more than 5.0 yards per carry(CS)• SAN DIEGO ST is 5-9 ATS(L5Y) at HOME - Against lesser defensive teams yielding more than 5.7

yards per play(CS)• SAN DIEGO ST is 10-1 UNDER(CS) - All Games

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?215 NAVY 54 40 25.0 25.7 24.1 216 SAN DIEGO ST -2.5 40 -3.3 27.1 28.6 26.6

RECENT NAVY BOWL GAME LOG RECENT SAN DIEGO ST BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/20/08 WAKE FOREST (Military) 19-29 L 3 L 44.5O 12/19/98 NORTH CAROLINA (Las Vegas) 13-20 L 7 T 42U12/31/09 MISSOURI (Texas) 35-13 W 6.5 W 54.5U 12/23/10 NAVY (Poinsetta) 35-14 W -3 W 57.5U12/23/10 SAN DIEGO ST (Poinsetta) 14-35 L 3 L 57.5U 12/17/11 LA LAFAYETTE (New Orleans) 30-32 L -6 L 60.5O12/29/12 ARIZONA ST (San Francisco) 28-62 L 12 L 55O 12/20/12 BYU (Poinsetta) 6-23 L 3 L 46U12/30/13 MIDDLE TENN ST (Armed Forces) 24-6 W -7 W 57U 12/21/13 BUFFALO (Famous Idaho Potato) 49-24 W 1 W 50O

RECENT NAVY BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT SAN DIEGO ST BOWL GAME TRENDS* FAVORITES have swept the L3 NAVY bowl games SU & ATS * Three of L5 SAN DIEGO ST bowl games went UNDER the total* NAVY lost to San Diego St 35-14 in 2010 Poinsettia Bowl * Including 2014, half of L6 SDSU bowl games were vs Independents* NAVY is 3-1 ATS in L4 bowl games vs Mountain West foes * This is 3rd time in five years that SDSU is playing in home bowl game

The Aztecs will be playing a home game in the Poinsettia Bowl. But the Midshipmen are no strangers to San Diego, as they are 1-2 in this bowl. In the 2010 matchup, the Aztecs rolled 35-14 as 3-point favorites. The game easily stayed under a total of 60. Navy also lost to Utah 35-32 in 2007, and beat Colorado State, 51-30 in 2005.

In most cases, a team returning to the same bowl game for the third time in five years would be a ho-hum experience. However, when that team is the host school, the excitement is not lost. San Diego State meets Navy in the 2014 Poinsettia Bowl and is hoping to emulate the results of the 2010 game between the teams, when the Aztecs easily took a 35-14 decision. This year’s game will mark the tenth installment of Qualcomm Stadium’s lesser of two bowl games it hosts. Betting history of the series finds Mountain West representatives owning a 7-2 ATS mark. Favorites have won eight of the games outright but are just 5-4 ATS. The last two games went UNDER the total, producing just 64 points combined.

Jim says: In the Poinsettia Bowl game of 2010 between San Diego State and Navy, head coach Rocky Long’s Aztecs’ club held the Middies to 14 points and gained 555 yards of offense. It was clear in that game that SDSU had better athletes. Is there any reason to suspect otherwise this time around? Navy is actually a lesser team now than it was back then. I don’t see why the results would differ. In three past games between these teams, the Aztecs are 3-0 SU & ATS and outscoring the Midshipmen by 25 PPG. Add to that the fact that Long’s team played one of its best games in a while in its 2013 bowl game and I have enough reasons to back the home team in this one.

RECENT POINSETTA BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/23/09 CALIFORNIA (P12) 27 UTAH (MWC) 37 -2.5 52.5 UTAH (MWC) UTAH (MWC) DOG DOG OVER12/23/10 SAN DIEGO ST (MWC) 35 NAVY (IND) 14 -3 57.5 SAN DIEGO ST (MWC) SAN DIEGO ST (MWC) FAV FAV UNDER12/21/11 TCU (MWC) 31 LOUISIANA TECH (WAC) 24 -9.5 53 TCU (MWC) LOUISIANA TECH (WAC) FAV DOG OVER12/20/12 BYU (IND) 23 SAN DIEGO ST (MWC) 6 -3 46 BYU (IND) BYU (IND) FAV FAV UNDER12/26/13 UTAH ST (MWC) 21 N ILLINOIS (MAC) 14 -2.5 55.5 UTAH ST (MWC) UTAH ST (MWC) FAV FAV UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Tuesday, December 23, 2014 - (215) NAVY at (216) SAN DIEGO ST (-2.5)San Diego St San Diego St San Diego St Navy San Diego St Navy San Diego St San Diego St

Tuesday, December 23, 2014 - (215) NAVY at (216) SAN DIEGO ST - TOTAL (54)UNDER* UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


30




In most circles, Central Michigan should have been better than 7-5 (5-7 ATS) because they had an experienced defense and enough skill position players to accomplish more. Former Michigan RB Thomas Rawls will be the Chippewas player that will catch your eye. CMU does have a good defensive squad which finished 16th nationally, but did allow more points versus better offenses. Western Kentucky made national headlines in ending Marshall’s perfect season in a wild 67-66 thriller. The Hilltoppers average 44 PPG and 525.3 YPG (No. 6), lead by senior QB Brandon Doughty. Western Kentucky is third in the country is passing yards at 365 per contest. RB Leon Allen adds balance to the offense, rushing for 1,490 yards. Why the Hilltoppers were only 7-5 (6-6 ATS) is they have one of the worst defenses in the FBS, surrendering over 500 yards a game and 39.2 PPG.

BAHAMAS BOWL • 12:00 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 24, 2014

C MICHIGAN 25.2 22 40-159 [4.0] 28-18-222 [7.9] 15.1 23.2 18 33-120 [3.6] 32-18-211 [6.7] 14.3 -6 +2.0 W KENTUCKY 44.0 27 33-162 [4.9] 43-29-365 [8.5] 12.0 39.2 26 46-230 [5.0] 31-20-272 [8.7] 12.8 +6 +4.8 C MICHIGAN 28.0 22 42-171 [4.0] 25-17-227 [9.0] 14.2 20.2 17 32-105 [3.3] 34-19-219 [6.4] 16.0 0 +7.8 W KENTUCKY 38.7 27 32-139 [4.3] 50-31-379 [7.5] 13.4 48.2 29 45-249 [5.5] 37-24-311 [8.4] 11.6 -1 -9.5

C MICHIGAN 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/28/14 CHATTANOOGA 36 -10.5 53.5 20-16 W L U 150 3.3 173 6.7 1 106 3.7 150 6.3 49/6/14 at PURDUE 33 +3 53 38-17 W W O 161 3.7 172 10.8 1 122 3.6 204 4.2 39/13/14 SYRACUSE 37 +5 50 3-40 L L U 34 1.5 183 5.4 2 289 5.9 175 5.8 09/20/14 at KANSAS 34 +5 44.5 10-24 L L U 101 2.9 178 6.8 3 138 3.9 231 6.8 19/27/14 at TOLEDO 39 +10.5 59 28-42 L L O 95 3.7 291 9.4 2 204 5.4 339 10.0 210/4/14 OHIO U 29 -3 49 28-10 W W U 234 4.5 233 8.6 1 89 3.9 98 4.7 010/11/14 at N ILLINOIS 40 +8 57 34-17 W W U 283 6.2 269 8.7 1 110 3.3 231 7.0 110/18/14 BALL ST 30 -9.5 53 29-32 L L O 181 4.9 245 7.7 5 89 2.3 198 5.2 110/25/14 at BUFFALO 30 -4 55 20-14 W W U 110 2.2 231 9.6 2 38 1.7 233 6.3 211/1/14 at E MICHIGAN 11 -13 48 38-7 W W U 278 5.1 223 9.7 2 21 0.7 76 4.0 211/15/14 MIAMI OHIO 23 -18 54 34-27 W L O 209 5.2 218 9.5 2 102 3.8 369 9.0 111/22/14 W MICHIGAN 37 -1.5 51.5 20-32 L L O 70 3.0 248 5.6 4 129 3.5 233 11.1 3W KENTUCKY 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/29/14 BOWLING GREEN 29 +7 64 59-31 W W O 133 3.2 569 10.2 0 151 4.3 314 8.7 09/6/14 at ILLINOIS 39 +3.5 69.5 34-42 L L O 103 3.4 297 6.2 3 64 1.8 456 9.1 39/13/14 at MIDDLE TENN ST 29 0 63 47-50 L L O 125 3.5 593 9.0 1 323 5.3 218 7.8 09/27/14 at NAVY 40 +8 67.5 36-27 W W U 164 4.8 387 7.2 1 412 7.9 55 3.7 210/4/14 UAB 33 -9.5 69.5 39-42 L L O 184 6.6 319 8.6 0 291 4.5 300 12.0 310/18/14 at FLA ATLANTIC 26 -3 65 38-45 L L O 67 2.6 335 7.6 2 278 5.1 341 9.7 110/25/14 OLD DOMINION 27 -13 77.5 66-51 W W O 230 5.1 371 14.3 2 172 5.1 471 11.8 311/1/14 at LOUISIANA TECH 45 +7.5 68 10-59 L L O 152 4.6 145 3.7 5 129 3.8 378 7.7 311/8/14 UTEP 29 -9 69 35-27 W L U 64 3.0 324 9.5 0 236 5.1 158 7.2 111/15/14 ARMY 26 -7.5 71.5 52-24 W W O 383 9.3 178 7.1 0 293 5.1 40 6.7 011/22/14 TX-SAN ANTONIO 27 -10.5 55.5 45-7 W W U 120 4.3 346 9.9 0 115 2.9 119 5.2 211/28/14 at MARSHALL 49 +23.5 76.5 67-66 W W O 222 6.3 516 10.1 2 291 8.1 417 9.1 4



(217) C MICHIGAN [SU:7-5 | ATS:5-7]

Head Coach: Dan Enos • Conference: MAC

(218) W KENTUCKY (-3 | 66) [SU:7-5 | ATS:6-6]Head Coach: Jeff Brohm • Conference: C-USA


C Michigan 65 66

W Kentucky -4.5 -3


31

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


31


THOMAS ROBINSON STADIUM (NASSAU, BAHAMAS)

• C MICHIGAN is 8-2 ATS(L3Y) - Against inept defensive teams yielding more than 6.3 yards per play(CS)

• W KENTUCKY is 5-11 ATS(L2Y) - Against inefficient defenses allowing less than 15.3 yards per point(CS)

• W KENTUCKY is 9-2 OVER(CS) - OU line of 60 or more

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?217 C MICHIGAN 66 34 29.0 29.0 UNDER 30.3 UNDER218 W KENTUCKY -3 38 -4.5 33.5 29.5 30.2

RECENT C MICHIGAN BOWL GAME LOG RECENT W KENTUCKY BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/26/06 MIDDLE TENN ST (Motor City) 31-14 W -9 W 51U 12/26/12 C MICHIGAN (Little Caesars) 21-24 L -6 L 55.5U12/26/07 PURDUE (Motor City) 48-51 L 8 W 71.5O12/26/08 FLA ATLANTIC (Motor City) 21-24 L -7 L 70U1/6/10 TROY (Godaddy) 44-41 W -3.5 L 63O12/26/12 W KENTUCKY (Little Caesars) 24-21 W 6 W 55.5U

RECENT C MICHIGAN BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT W KENTUCKY BOWL GAME TRENDS* C MICHIGAN is 2-0 SU & ATS in bowl games not vs Sun Belt foes * W KENTUCKY-C MICHIGAN game is rematch of 2012 bowl in Detroit* UNDERDOGS are 4-0 ATS in L4 CMU bowl games * WKU was also favored in prior bowl game vs CMU but lost 24-21* CHIPPEWAS are 2-0 ATS as bowl game underdogs * UNDER & UNDERDOG were winners in 2012 CMU-WKU game

Christmas Eve afternoon in Nassua, Bahamas is the tropical stage for this inaugural bowl game. It’s actually a rematch of the 2012 Little Caesars Bowl in Ford Field -- a 24-21 Chippewas’ win in Dan Enos’ only other bowl appearance in five seasons. The Hilltoppers finished 7-5 in Jeff Brohm’s first season, including a perfect-season-spoiling 67-66 win over Marshall.

Western Kentucky has only played in one prior bowl game, that being the 2012 Little Caesar’s Bowl. Ironically, the opponent in that game was Central Michigan. However, you can rest assured that these teams will be thrilled to be meeting each other in the inaugural Bahamas Bowl game in Nassau. Where would you rather spend Christmas Eve, in Detroit or the Bahamas? No need to answer. The Chippewas won that last bowl meeting 24-21, but didn’t make it to a postseason game a year ago. Interestingly, the Hilltoppers won eight games last year, one more than both 2012 and this season, yet were left to the same fate as CMU last December, bowl-less. If this game reminds you of a Premier League soccer match, don’t feel strange, as Thomas Robinson Stadium is a multi-purpose stadium currently used mostly for soccer matches.

Paul says: Western Kentucky averages 44 points a game and can score on anybody with its terrific passing game which was one of the best in the country. While Central Michigan had a fine season, they only averaging 25 points a contest, which should make it difficult for them even if the Hilltoppers defense is among the worst in the country. I also believe the Chippewas defense is a little overrated, while their yardage numbers look very good, they only held opposing teams to just one point below their season average. Too much offense from Western Kentucky who keeps the pressure on CMU and wins by 10.

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Wednesday, December 24, 2014 - (217) C MICHIGAN vs. (218) W KENTUCKY (-3)W Kentucky C Michigan W Kentucky* W Kentucky* W Kentucky W Kentucky C Michigan W Kentucky

Wednesday, December 24, 2014 - (217) C MICHIGAN vs. (218) W KENTUCKY - TOTAL (66)UNDER* OVER OVER* OVER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER

RECENT BAHAMAS BOWL GAMESDATE* This marks the inaugural game in the BAHAMAS Bowl series



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


32




Fresno State enters the bowl fray as the only team with a losing record (6-7, 7-6 ATS) and slipped in because they had a .500 regular season record before losing to Boise State in the MWC championship game. The Bulldogs do deserve some credit since they had to win their last three games to take their division. Fresno State is ordinary on offense (28.1 PPG) and below average on defense (32.6), but should not be lacking for motivation with a recent 0-5 SU and ATS bowl record. Rice began 0-3 and had a 3.5 percent chance of making it to a bowl (18 of 508 since 1980) game. But the Owls responded by winning six straight and had a chance to repeat as C-USA West champs, before falling to Louisiana Tech. Don’t think the game will not matter to Rice since they have only reached 8-wins three times in the last two decades.

HAWAII BOWL • 8:00 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 24, 2014

FRESNO ST 28.1 22 40-184 [4.6] 38-22-235 [6.2] 14.9 32.6 20 44-207 [4.7] 29-17-249 [8.6] 14.0 -5 -4.5 RICE 28.7 20 44-171 [3.9] 27-16-224 [8.2] 13.8 30.3 20 35-152 [4.4] 31-17-245 [7.8] 13.1 +6 -1.6 FRESNO ST 26.1 22 40-165 [4.2] 40-23-264 [6.6] 16.4 35.7 22 49-229 [4.7] 27-17-233 [8.7] 12.9 -8 -9.6 RICE 26.4 19 41-152 [3.7] 28-16-217 [7.9] 14.0 37.7 22 39-199 [5.1] 30-17-263 [8.8] 12.3 +4 -11.3

FRESNO ST 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 at USC 55 +18.5 58 13-52 L L O 157 4.8 160 4.4 4 277 4.3 424 10.3 29/6/14 at UTAH 46 +13 65.5 27-59 L L O 55 1.4 283 7.1 1 258 4.8 268 9.9 09/13/14 NEBRASKA 50 +11 60 19-55 L L O 105 3.8 241 4.1 0 280 6.7 282 11.8 19/20/14 S UTAH 16 -17.5 61.5 56-16 W W O 389 7.2 305 8.0 1 57 1.7 318 10.6 29/26/14 at NEW MEXICO 27 -6.5 65.5 35-24 W W U 272 6.0 321 7.6 2 285 5.2 97 12.1 010/3/14 SAN DIEGO ST 40 -3 58.5 24-13 W W U 172 4.0 143 5.1 2 186 4.1 84 3.5 310/10/14 at UNLV 22 -9.5 65 27-30 L L U 177 5.4 310 7.0 3 146 3.2 332 8.3 110/17/14 at BOISE ST 51 +18 61 27-37 L W O 186 5.5 127 5.1 1 264 5.2 228 7.1 111/1/14 WYOMING 27 -16 58 17-45 L L O 167 5.4 149 5.1 2 374 8.7 320 11.4 111/8/14 SAN JOSE ST 27 +1 57.5 38-24 W W O 232 4.4 207 8.0 2 86 3.7 350 8.0 311/22/14 at NEVADA 38 +7.5 62.5 40-20 W W U 238 4.6 313 6.7 2 227 6.0 126 5.3 411/29/14 HAWAII 30 -9.5 60.5 28-21 W L U 171 4.6 162 5.1 2 106 2.3 247 6.3 212/6/14 at BOISE ST 51 +23.5 70 14-28 L W U 70 1.7 332 7.2 3 149 4.5 155 9.7 0RICE 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 at NOTRE DAME 47 +19.5 53 17-48 L L O 141 3.5 226 8.7 2 281 6.7 295 13.4 09/13/14 at TEXAS A&M 50 +30.5 69 10-38 L W U 240 4.4 241 6.7 0 168 6.5 309 9.4 19/20/14 OLD DOMINION 27 -7 63.5 42-45 L L O 284 5.3 242 7.1 0 100 4.8 430 10.0 09/27/14 at SOUTHERN MISS 23 -8.5 59 41-23 W W O 217 4.5 178 8.1 1 40 1.7 283 6.2 310/4/14 HAWAII 30 -6 56 28-14 W W U 143 3.3 248 10.8 3 144 3.2 117 4.3 210/11/14 at ARMY 26 -2.5 57.5 41-21 W W O 182 4.4 209 10.0 0 250 4.6 91 6.5 210/25/14 NORTH TEXAS 24 -16 56 41-21 W W O 188 4.1 233 9.0 0 26 0.8 190 5.6 211/1/14 at FLA INTERNATIONAL 27 -6 46 31-17 W W O 169 4.4 230 9.2 0 102 2.2 159 6.9 211/8/14 TX-SAN ANTONIO 27 -7.5 44 17-7 W W U 207 3.7 213 7.6 1 104 4.5 153 4.8 111/15/14 at MARSHALL 49 +20.5 65.5 14-41 L L U 81 2.3 99 4.3 0 284 6.5 297 8.0 211/21/14 UTEP 29 -7.5 48.5 31-13 W W U 165 3.9 227 10.3 1 53 2.1 209 7.0 211/29/14 at LOUISIANA TECH 45 +7 47.5 31-76 L L O 34 1.1 337 8.4 4 269 7.5 408 11.7 1



(219) FRESNO ST [SU:6-7 | ATS:7-6]

Head Coach: Tim DeRuyter • Conference: Mountain West

(220) RICE (-1 | 59) [SU:7-5 | ATS:8-4]Head Coach: David Bailiff • Conference: C-USA


Fresno St -1 59

Rice 59 -1


33

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


33


ALOHA STADIUM (HONOLULU, HI)

• RICE is 9-2 ATS(L3Y) - Against lesser passing defenses yielding more than 7.5 yards per attempt(CS)

• FRESNO ST is 4-8 ATS(S2000) - In December Bowl Games• RICE is 9-1 OVER(L5Y) - Against poor defensive teams yielding more than 6.0 yards per play(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?219 FRESNO ST 59 35 28.9 28.8 30.8 FST220 RICE -1 33 2 28.8 29.2 26.8

RECENT FRESNO ST BOWL GAME LOG RECENT RICE BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/20/08 COLORADO ST (New Mexico) 35-40 L -1.5 L 61O 12/27/61 KANSAS (Bluebonnet) 7-33 L - - -12/19/09 WYOMING (New Mexico) 28-35 L -10 L 54.5O 12/22/06 TROY (New Orleans) 17-41 L -5 L 55O12/18/10 N ILLINOIS (Humanitarian) 17-40 L 1.5 L 56.5O 12/30/08 W MICHIGAN (Texas) 38-14 W -2 W 73.5U12/24/12 SMU (Hawaii) 10-43 L -14 L 62.5U 12/29/12 AIR FORCE (Armed Forces) 33-14 W -1 W 61U12/21/13 USC (Las Vegas) 20-45 L 4.5 L 65.5U 12/31/13 MISSISSIPPI ST (Liberty) 7-44 L 7 L 50.5O

RECENT FRESNO ST BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT RICE BOWL GAME TRENDS* FRESNO ST has lost five straight bowl games SU & ATS * RICE lost LY in only prior bowl game as an UNDERDOG* BULLDOGS are on a 0-4 SU & ATS skid as bowl game favorites * RICE beat Air Force in '12 Armed Forces Bowl, only bowl vs MWC* UNDERDOGS are 9-3 ATS in L12 FRESNO ST bowl games * FAVORITES have swpet L3 RICE bowl games SU & ATS

These teams matched in the Christmas Eve Hawai’i Bowl played five consecutive seasons (2000-2004) as Western Athletic Conference members. All five matchups finished over the total. The Bulldogs won all five meetings SU, but the Owls held a 3-2 ATS advantage, covering as dogs of 6, 16.5 and 20 points. The Bulldogs have lost their last five bowl games, including two under Tim DeRuyter.

Some of the biggest bowl game upsets in recent memory have come out of Hawaii, as four straight double-digit underdogs have won the Hawaii Bowl game outright, including two years ago when Fresno State was the victim. What’s more, six straight DD dogs have beaten the pointspread. Unfortunately, this year’s line (Rice -1 at presstime) shows the tightest pointspread the game has seen since ’99. Underdogs overall own a 10-5-1 ATS record since that time. However, more importantly, bettors should be welcoming back Rice and Conference USA to this affair, as teams from that league are on a 6-3 SU & 7-1-1 ATS run in this bowl series. Four of the L5 Hawaii Bowl games went UNDER the total.

Jason says: I consider myself a big stat guy in college football and some stats can be quite revealing. Looking beyond the obvious facts like Fresno State is 6-7 and not very good, their defense has to be a big concern heading into the Hawaii Bowl matchup against Rice. One particular defensive stat jumps out at me the most…8.6 yards per pass attempt allowed. Now granted, the Bulldogs have faced some good passing attacks throughout the season, but in truth, they’ve been shredded by mediocre ones too. Rice is not a real great defense either, allowing 8.8 yards per pass attempt in road games. The Owls come off a game allowing 76 points and 677 yards to Louisiana Tech. You can be assured that FSU is studying tape of that game. I don’t see either team stopping the other in this one, go OVER.

RECENT HAWAII BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/24/09 NEVADA (WAC) 10 SMU (CUSA) 45 -11 69.5 SMU (CUSA) SMU (CUSA) DOG DOG UNDER12/24/10 HAWAII (WAC) 35 TULSA (CUSA) 62 -10 75.5 TULSA (CUSA) TULSA (CUSA) DOG DOG OVER12/24/11 SOUTHERN MISS (CUSA) 24 NEVADA (WAC) 17 -7 65 SOUTHERN MISS (CUSA) PUSH (PUSH) FAV PUSH UNDER12/24/12 FRESNO ST (MWC) 10 SMU (CUSA) 43 -14 62.5 SMU (CUSA) SMU (CUSA) DOG DOG UNDER12/24/13 OREGON ST (P12) 38 BOISE ST (MWC) 23 -4.5 67 OREGON ST (P12) OREGON ST (P12) FAV FAV UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Wednesday, December 24, 2014 - (219) FRESNO ST vs. (220) RICE (-1)Fresno St Rice Rice Rice Fresno St Fresno St Fresno St Fresno St

Wednesday, December 24, 2014 - (219) FRESNO ST vs. (220) RICE - TOTAL (59)UNDER OVER* OVER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


34




With Illinois head coach Tim Beckman considered all but a goner after 2-10, 4-8 and 4-6 this season after Iowa spanked his squad 30-14 in Champaign, the team did become the Fighting Illini in winning last two games to finish 6-6 (5-7 ATS). Illinois showed some earlier they were improved in upsetting Minnesota and covering versus Wisconsin. Problem for this bowl is 112th ranked defense which was 120th against the run at 249.6 YPG. Louisiana Tech nearly won the C-USA title, just falling short on the road at Marshall 26-23. The Bulldogs were 10-3 ATS on the year but had some odd losses to Northwestern State and Old Dominion. The Louisiana Tech defense was special in one category with 40 turnovers, which was the best in the country. This is just the Bulldogs fourth bowl game in two decades and should be fired up for a Big Ten opponent.

HEART OF DALLAS BOWL • 1:00 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 26, 2014

ILLINOIS 26.6 18 32-117 [3.7] 35-22-243 [6.9] 13.5 33.9 23 49-250 [5.1] 28-17-215 [7.5] 13.7 -2 -7.3 LOUISIANA TECH 37.5 20 35-151 [4.3] 34-20-253 [7.5] 10.8 25.2 19 36-118 [3.3] 37-22-238 [6.4] 14.1 +15 +12.3 ILLINOIS 24.4 18 36-140 [3.9] 30-16-192 [6.5] 13.6 43.0 26 51-311 [6.0] 27-16-190 [6.9] 11.7 -3 -18.6LOUISIANA TECH 30.5 19 35-132 [3.8] 34-20-234 [6.9] 12.0 29.2 21 36-129 [3.6] 38-24-259 [6.8] 13.3 +7 +1.3

ILLINOIS 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 YOUNGSTOWN ST 28 -16.5 67.5 28-17 W L U 78 3.5 285 7.5 1 203 3.4 177 7.4 09/6/14 W KENTUCKY 38 -3.5 69.5 42-34 W W O 64 1.8 456 9.1 3 103 3.4 297 6.2 39/13/14 at WASHINGTON 50 +13 64 19-44 L L U 72 2.8 279 9.0 3 245 4.2 219 10.0 19/20/14 TEXAS ST UNIV 30 -10.5 61.5 42-35 W L O 219 8.1 266 6.8 1 139 2.7 336 7.8 19/27/14 at NEBRASKA 50 +21 58.5 14-45 L L O 78 3.3 261 6.9 3 458 6.5 166 7.9 210/4/14 PURDUE 33 -9.5 52 27-38 L L O 65 2.6 450 8.5 2 349 7.8 202 10.1 010/11/14 at WISCONSIN 56 +27 59 28-38 L W O 153 3.9 135 5.6 1 401 8.5 97 5.4 010/25/14 MINNESOTA 48 +3.5 54 28-24 W W U 123 3.0 140 6.1 1 171 4.2 240 8.0 311/1/14 at OHIO ST 62 +28.5 62 14-55 L L O 106 2.5 137 5.1 4 296 6.7 249 7.3 111/15/14 IOWA 47 +5.5 54 14-30 L L U 88 3.5 147 4.7 0 304 5.5 283 11.8 111/22/14 PENN ST 42 +5.5 44.5 16-14 W W U 68 2.5 215 5.1 0 172 3.7 93 5.8 111/29/14 at NORTHWESTERN 40 +7 51 47-33 W W O 291 6.2 147 5.3 1 154 4.1 218 5.2 5LOUISIANA TECH 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 at OKLAHOMA 56 +34.5 56.5 16-48 L W O 54 1.9 191 5.3 1 183 4.6 253 7.4 29/6/14 at LA LAFAYETTE 31 +16 58.5 48-20 W W O 238 6.8 295 8.9 0 178 5.2 237 5.4 39/11/14 at NORTH TEXAS 24 +3 48 42-21 W W O 98 3.3 260 7.2 1 104 2.9 175 5.1 29/20/14 NORTHWESTERN ST 25 -23 61.5 27-30 L L U 133 4.0 280 8.2 5 102 2.7 205 5.9 29/27/14 at AUBURN 60 +33 59.5 17-45 L W O 105 3.2 216 6.2 2 254 5.3 219 10.0 010/4/14 UTEP 29 -12.5 56 55-3 W W O 256 6.0 187 11.0 2 81 2.3 143 5.1 510/18/14 TX-SAN ANTONIO 27 -11.5 44 27-20 W L O 121 3.5 157 4.8 1 134 3.4 190 5.8 410/25/14 at SOUTHERN MISS 23 -7 55.5 31-20 W W U 30 1.2 423 9.2 2 -31 -1.2 379 7.7 211/1/14 W KENTUCKY 38 -7.5 68 59-10 W W O 129 3.8 378 7.7 3 152 4.6 145 3.7 511/8/14 at UAB 33 -5 53.5 40-24 W W O 228 5.0 200 5.9 3 128 3.4 198 5.4 311/22/14 at OLD DOMINION 27 -13.5 65 27-30 L L U 109 3.2 217 7.0 2 93 2.9 302 7.6 411/29/14 RICE 33 -7 47.5 76-31 W W O 269 7.5 408 11.7 1 34 1.1 337 8.4 412/6/14 at MARSHALL 49 +8.5 67 23-26 L W U 196 4.4 72 3.6 2 121 3.5 308 6.7 4



(221) ILL INOIS [SU:6-6 | ATS:5-7]

Head Coach: Tim Beckman • Conference: Big Ten

(222) LOUISIANA TECH (-6 | 61.5) [SU:8-5 | ATS:10-3]Head Coach: Skip Holtz • Conference: C-USA


Illinois 63 61.5

Louisiana Tech -3 -6


35

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


35


COTTON BOWL (DALLAS, TX)

• LOUISIANA TECH is 8-2 ATS(L5Y) - Non-conference VS BIG 5• ILLINOIS is 4-12 ATS(L3Y) - Against efficient offenses averaging less than 13.2 yards per point(CS)• ILLINOIS is 9-2 OVER(L2Y) - Against decent offensive teams averaging more than 5.7 yards per

play(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?221 ILLINOIS 61.5 39 22.9 25.9 UNDER 25.9 UNDER222 LOUISIANA TECH -6 45 -6.5 34.9 LT 30.0 27.5

RECENT ILLINOIS BOWL GAME LOG RECENT LOUISIANA TECH BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/30/99 VIRGINIA (Champs Sports) 63-21 W 2.5 W 57.5O 12/16/78 EAST CAROLINA (Independence) 13-35 L - - -1/1/02 LSU (Sugar) 34-47 L 1.5 L 55.5O 12/15/90 MARYLAND (Independence) 34-34 T 1.5 W -1/1/08 USC (Rose) 17-49 L 13 L 48O 12/31/01 CLEMSON (Humanitarian) 24-49 L 6.5 L 60.5O12/29/10 BAYLOR (Texas) 38-14 W -2 W 64.5U 12/28/08 N ILLINOIS (Independence) 17-10 W -2.5 W 46U12/31/11 UCLA (San Francisco) 20-14 W -3 W 45U 12/21/11 TCU (Poinsetta) 24-31 L 9.5 W 53O

RECENT ILLINOIS BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT LOUISIANA TECH BOWL GAME TRENDS* ILLINOIS is on a 4-2 SU & ATS bowl game surge * LOUISIANA TECH is 2-0 ATS in bowl games over decade* FAVORITES have swept the L4 ILLINOIS bowl games SU & ATS * LT was crushed by Clemson last bowl game vs power conference team* ILLINOIS is 4-1 SU & ATS in L5 bowl games when scoring 20+ points * BULLDOGS won only prior bowl game when favored

This Heart of Dallas Bowl matchup in the Cotton Bowl is a rematch of the 2012 non-conference tilt in which the Bulldogs went into Champaign and put a 52-24 whipping on the Illini as 3-point dogs, falling just short of a 57 total by themselves. LT’s Skip Holtz is 2-3 SU bowls. This is Tim Beckman’s first bowl game in three seasons with the Illini.

The Heart of Dallas Bowl game has been played on January 1st or 2nd in each of the first four years of its existence, but truthfully, with a matchup like Illinois and Louisiana Tech, the game is much better suited for the day after Christmas. That’s not to say we shouldn’t see a good game at the Cotton Bowl this season, just that it’s not your typical New Year’s matchup. In last year’s game, North Texas walloped UNLV, the fourth straight time that the favorite emerged victorious (3-1 ATS). Big Ten teams played in the first three installments of this series and failed to win a game while going 1-2 ATS. Illinois is not expected to break that trend either, playing as a sizeable underdog. Interestingly, although only two of the four prior Heart of Dallas Bowl games went OVER the total, winning teams have scored 42.3 PPG.

Paul says: Nice work by Illinois to become bowl eligible and secure a bid, but they are running into the wrong type of opponent is Dallas. The Fighting Illini surrendered 250 yards a game to opposing teams on the ground and in Louisiana Tech’s last four contests, they averaged over 200 yards a game, including controlling Marshall in the C-USA championship by rushing for 196 yards. Plus, the Bulldogs have the opportunity to knock off a Big Ten team and despite being favored, coach Skip Holtz will use the “respect” card and have is club fired up to win by 10 or more.

RECENT HEART OF DALLAS BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U1/1/11 TEXAS TECH (B12) 45 NORTHWESTERN (B10) 38 -8 63 TEXAS TECH (B12) NORTHWESTERN (B10) FAV DOG OVER1/2/12 HOUSTON (CUSA) 30 PENN ST (B10) 14 -6.5 56 HOUSTON (CUSA) HOUSTON (CUSA) FAV FAV UNDER1/1/13 OKLAHOMA ST (B12) 58 PURDUE (B10) 14 -18 69 OKLAHOMA ST (B12) OKLAHOMA ST (B12) FAV FAV OVER1/1/14 NORTH TEXAS (CUSA) 36 UNLV (MWC) 14 -6 53 NORTH TEXAS (CUSA) NORTH TEXAS (CUSA) FAV FAV UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Friday, December 26, 2014 - (221) ILLINOIS vs. (222) LOUISIANA TECH (-6)Illinois* Illinois* Louisiana Tech* Louisiana Tech* Louisiana Tech Louisiana Tech Illinois Louisiana Tech

Friday, December 26, 2014 - (221) ILLINOIS vs. (222) LOUISIANA TECH - TOTAL (61.5)OVER UNDER* OVER OVER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


36




Checked our preseason notes and all seven football annuals we purchased had Rutgers finishing last in the Big Ten East, thus going to this bowl game a reason celebration at 7-5 SU and ATS. The Scarlet Knights had problems with the upper echelon of the conference, but QB Gary Nova and a big-play passing game allowed them to have success against similarly talented foes, like they will face in this contest. The opposite ended up being true about North Carolina compared to Rutgers, as the Tar Heels were the consensus choice to win the Coastal Division and were never in the chase thanks to a defense conceding 38.9 PPG. On offense, North Carolina has scored 34.2 PPG as Marquise Williams blossomed as a dual-threat quarterback. The knock on the Heels is they lack discipline under coach Larry Fedora. What North Carolina shows up for this bowl contest is anyone’s guess.

QUICK LANE BOWL • 4:30 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 26, 2014S

RUTGERS 25.6 18 37-148 [4.0] 28-16-231 [8.2] 14.8 30.9 21 38-213 [5.6] 30-17-228 [7.7] 14.3 -4 -5.3 NORTH CAROLINA 34.2 24 38-145 [3.8] 39-24-280 [7.2] 12.4 38.9 24 46-232 [5.0] 31-18-263 [8.5] 12.7 +2 -4.7 RUTGERS 26.2 20 40-172 [4.3] 28-16-220 [7.8] 15.0 40.5 23 36-219 [6.0] 30-19-277 [9.2] 12.2 -3 -14.3NORTH CAROLINA 35.3 23 39-139 [3.6] 38-23-303 [8.0] 12.5 44.0 27 44-204 [4.7] 38-23-321 [8.5] 11.9 +1 -8.7

RUTGERS 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/28/14 vs. WASHINGTON ST 40 +7.5 61 41-38 W W O 215 5.0 281 10.4 1 6 0.4 532 9.5 29/6/14 HOWARD 10 -38 58 38-25 W L O 109 2.9 288 13.1 1 269 6.4 168 5.8 29/13/14 PENN ST 42 +3.5 52 10-13 L W U 102 3.3 192 6.2 5 64 1.9 309 7.0 19/20/14 at NAVY 40 +6 55.5 31-24 W W U 284 5.1 151 10.8 1 171 4.0 231 10.5 19/27/14 TULANE 29 -13 53.5 31-6 W W U 171 4.3 291 13.9 1 152 4.9 152 5.2 010/4/14 MICHIGAN 42 -3 46.5 26-24 W L O 74 2.5 402 10.1 0 158 4.5 178 8.1 110/18/14 at OHIO ST 62 +20.5 62 17-56 L L O 149 3.9 196 6.8 3 324 8.1 261 8.4 110/25/14 at NEBRASKA 50 +19.5 60.5 24-42 L W O 143 3.8 205 7.9 1 292 7.1 163 7.4 211/1/14 WISCONSIN 56 +12.5 51.5 0-37 L L U 76 2.6 63 2.3 1 298 6.5 87 4.4 111/15/14 INDIANA 34 -8.5 54 45-23 W W O 212 5.3 217 8.0 1 294 5.5 179 5.8 311/22/14 at MICHIGAN ST 62 +24 57 3-45 L L U 95 3.3 139 4.5 3 242 5.5 278 10.7 211/29/14 at MARYLAND 42 +7.5 53 41-38 W W O 144 4.1 347 8.3 2 281 7.8 195 8.1 0NORTH CAROLINA 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 LIBERTY 29 -31.5 56 56-29 W L O 208 4.3 235 5.2 4 157 3.8 189 5.7 69/6/14 SAN DIEGO ST 40 -14 59.5 31-27 W L U 131 4.0 263 8.5 1 168 4.8 341 8.7 39/20/14 at EAST CAROLINA 44 -1 67 41-70 L L O 145 3.7 294 6.8 1 343 7.5 446 8.7 19/27/14 at CLEMSON 53 +14 63.5 35-50 L L O 84 2.8 394 8.0 1 92 2.1 436 11.2 110/4/14 VIRGINIA TECH 43 +2.5 57.5 17-34 L L U 125 4.3 198 5.4 3 171 3.0 186 6.9 110/11/14 at NOTRE DAME 47 +16.5 61.5 43-50 L W O 184 4.4 326 7.8 2 219 5.1 300 7.9 310/18/14 GEORGIA TECH 56 -2.5 68 48-43 W W O 189 4.6 390 8.3 1 376 7.4 235 13.1 110/25/14 at VIRGINIA 46 +7 60.5 28-27 W W U 99 2.9 275 9.5 1 159 3.7 284 6.9 211/1/14 at MIAMI FL 47 +17 67.5 20-47 L L U 6 0.2 252 6.6 2 295 6.0 199 10.5 111/15/14 PITTSBURGH 45 -2.5 67 40-35 W W O 226 5.3 276 6.9 0 305 5.8 218 13.6 111/20/14 at DUKE 44 +5 67 45-20 W W U 315 5.5 276 10.2 3 116 3.1 262 6.6 311/29/14 NC STATE 43 -6.5 69 7-35 L L U 30 1.1 177 5.1 2 388 6.7 66 6.0 0



(223) RUTGERS [SU:7-5 | ATS:7-5]

Head Coach: Kyle Flood • Conference: Big Ten

(224) NORTH CAROLINA (-3 | 66.5) [SU:6-6 | ATS:5-7]Head Coach: Larry Fedora • Conference: ACC


Rutgers 65.5 66.5

North Carolina -4 -3


37

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


37


FORD FIELD (DETROIT, MI)

• RUTGERS is 6-1-1 ATS(S2000) - In Bowl Games• NORTH CAROLINA is 3-7 ATS(CS) - VS Non-ranked team• RUTGERS is 11-3 UNDER(L5Y) - AS underdog of 7 or less points

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?223 RUTGERS 66.5 38 31.1 32.4 26.7 UNDER224 NORTH CAROLINA -3 43 -4.8 34.1 32.6 33.5

RECENT RUTGERS BOWL GAME LOG RECENT NORTH CAROLINA BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/29/08 NC STATE (Birmingham) 29-23 W -6 T 57.5U 12/27/08 WEST VIRGINIA (Belk) 30-31 L 2.5 W 47.5O12/19/09 UCF (St Peterburg) 45-24 W -2.5 W 45O 12/26/09 PITTSBURGH (Belk) 17-19 L 1 L 46U12/30/11 IOWA ST (Pinstripe) 27-13 W 1.5 W 46U 12/30/10 TENNESSEE (Music City) 30-27 W 1 W 50O12/28/12 VIRGINIA TECH (Russell Athletic) 10-13 L -1 L 42U 12/26/11 MISSOURI (Independence) 24-41 L 4.5 L 54O12/28/13 NOTRE DAME (Pinstripe) 16-29 L 14.5 W 54U 12/28/13 CINCINNATI (Belk) 39-17 W -2.5 W 59.5U

RECENT RUTGERS BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT NORTH CAROLINA BOWL GAME TRENDS* UNDERDOGS are on a 3-0 ATS run in RUTGERS bowl games * UNC has played 30 prior bowl games, only one vs a Big Ten foe* RUTGERS is 6-1-1 ATS in bowl games since '05 * NORTH CAROLINA is 6-1 SU & 5-1-1 ATS in L7 as bowl game chalk* RUTGERS' L3 bowl games went UNDER total, producing 36 PPG * FAVORITES are 8-3-1 ATS in UNC's L12 bowl games

The inaugural Quick Lane Bowl follows the MAC Championship game into Ford Field in Detroit. The Scarlet Knights and Tar Heels have met four times (2006-2011), with a 2-2 ATS split, a 4-0 ATS mark for road teams, and Under’s going 3-1. Larry Fedora won his UNC bowl debut last season, and is 3-2 SU overall in bowls. Rutgers’ Kyle Flood is 0-2 SU in bowls.

The Quick Lane Bowl was last known as the Little Caesar’s Bowl but is probably best remembered for its long standing identity, the Motor City Bowl. That name of course comes from its host city, Detroit, who usher’s in a new era of this contest with the name change for 2014. It also welcomes in a new type of matchup, as two power conference schools meet for the first time. This has typically been a David vs. Goliath type of game, but for 2014, Rutgers represents the Big Ten while North Carolina plays on behalf of the ACC. The Scarlet Knights hope to carry the torch of past underdogs that have thrived in this game, as that side wager has boasted a 5-1-1 ATS record since 2008. Either way, it should be competitive if history serves as any indication, as all of the last seven games in this series have been decided by 5 points or less.

Steve Makinen says: I am one to believe that explosive offense drive bowl games to high scoring levels, not porous defenses. I gauge the offenses of both North Carolina and Rutgers to be somewhat average. They’ve also been inconsistent. Rutgers was held to 10 points or less on three different occasions this season, and UNC closed the regular season out with a 7-point offensive effort against NC State. Now, both teams showed the capability of putting up numbers this season with the ball, however, I’d rather rely on the full body of average offensive work when considering the available wagering options on a lofty total like 66. I also think this particular bowl game tends to lend itself to the Christmas hangover effect. I’ll go UNDER here.

RECENT QUICK LANE BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/26/09 OHIO U (MAC) 17 MARSHALL (CUSA) 21 -3 49 MARSHALL (CUSA) MARSHALL (CUSA) DOG DOG UNDER12/26/10 FLA INTERNATIONAL (SBC)34 TOLEDO (MAC) 32 -2 58.5 FLA INTERNATIONAL (SBC)PUSH (PUSH) FAV PUSH OVER12/27/11 PURDUE (B10) 37 W MICHIGAN (MAC) 32 -1.5 62.5 PURDUE (B10) PURDUE (B10) FAV FAV OVER12/26/12 W KENTUCKY (SBC) 21 C MICHIGAN (MAC) 24 -6 55.5 C MICHIGAN (MAC) C MICHIGAN (MAC) DOG DOG UNDER12/26/13 BOWLING GREEN (MAC) 27 PITTSBURGH (ACC) 30 -6.5 50 PITTSBURGH (ACC) PITTSBURGH (ACC) DOG DOG OVER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Friday, December 26, 2014 - (223) RUTGERS vs. (224) NORTH CAROLINA (-3)Rutgers Rutgers Rutgers Rutgers North Carolina North Carolina North Carolina Rutgers

Friday, December 26, 2014 - (223) RUTGERS vs. (224) NORTH CAROLINA - TOTAL (66.5)UNDER OVER UNDER UNDER* UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


38




Central Florida (9-3, 8-4 ATS) makes the trip across the state to St. Petersburg to play in this bowl for the third time in six years. The Knights started 0-2 coming off their Fiesta Bowl season and understood replacing Blake Bortles was not going to be simple. Central Florida tied for the AAC title because of its No.3 rated defense which can stop the run or pass. Offensively, the Knights improved as the season wore on; however, in eight of their 12 assignments they committed two or more turnovers. N.C. State ended being one of many teams which could have knocked off Florida State but did not. That defeat sent the Wolfpack into a tailspin, yet this young club dug deep and closed 3-1 and was 4-1 ATS in their last five outings to win seven times. Keep an eye on N.C. State QB Jacoby Brissett; he might be the difference in the bowl battle.

ST PETERSBURG BOWL • 8:00 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 26, 2014

NC STATE 29.8 21 38-206 [5.4] 29-17-196 [6.7] 13.5 27.0 21 41-176 [4.3] 29-17-197 [6.7] 13.8 +5 +2.8 UCF 28.2 20 41-132 [3.2] 30-17-231 [7.6] 12.9 17.9 16 32-97 [3.1] 34-19-185 [5.4] 15.8 -1 +10.3 NC STATE 25.2 19 43-215 [5.0] 26-14-157 [6.1] 14.8 22.4 18 35-106 [3.0] 33-16-209 [6.4] 14.1 +2 +2.8 UCF 21.3 19 38-113 [3.0] 30-17-207 [6.9] 15.0 23.8 20 31-92 [3.0] 38-23-259 [6.7] 14.7 -3 -2.5

NC STATE 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 GA SOUTHERN 37 -20.5 57.5 24-23 W L U 173 4.9 291 7.3 1 246 5.2 192 11.3 19/6/14 OLD DOMINION 27 -15.5 66 46-34 W L O 242 6.2 253 8.7 0 196 5.3 308 6.2 19/13/14 at SOUTH FLORIDA 29 -2.5 52.5 49-17 W W O 315 5.9 274 8.3 2 70 2.6 89 4.5 39/20/14 PRESBYTERIAN 14 -40 56.5 42-0 W W U 265 8.5 195 8.9 0 122 2.7 130 5.2 19/27/14 FLORIDA ST 58 +17 60 41-56 L W O 161 4.4 359 7.2 2 166 5.0 365 9.6 410/4/14 at CLEMSON 53 +14 64 0-41 L L U 121 3.2 35 1.8 3 226 4.5 267 8.9 010/11/14 BOSTON COLLEGE 46 -2 55 14-30 L L U 43 1.5 174 5.8 2 310 5.4 101 5.3 110/18/14 at LOUISVILLE 52 +19 49 18-30 L W U 128 4.1 223 7.0 1 166 5.0 203 5.6 011/1/14 at SYRACUSE 37 +2.5 53 24-17 W W U 121 3.5 186 5.6 0 38 1.0 307 7.3 311/8/14 GEORGIA TECH 56 +3 62.5 23-56 L L O 155 5.5 213 6.1 3 479 7.5 70 8.8 211/15/14 WAKE FOREST 29 -16 44.5 42-13 W W O 362 7.9 83 4.4 0 58 1.7 161 5.0 111/29/14 at NORTH CAROLINA 43 +6.5 69 35-7 W W U 388 6.7 66 6.0 0 30 1.1 177 5.1 2UCF 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 vs. PENN ST 42 -2 43.5 24-26 L L O 24 0.8 222 10.1 1 57 2.0 454 9.7 39/13/14 at MISSOURI 52 +10 53.5 10-38 L L U 90 2.3 209 5.8 4 178 5.1 144 6.0 19/20/14 BETHUNE-COOKMAN 20 -23.5 50.5 41-7 W W U 169 4.1 182 14.0 0 72 1.7 101 6.7 010/2/14 at HOUSTON 41 +2.5 48.5 17-12 W W U 127 3.4 101 5.6 1 117 3.5 214 5.0 310/9/14 BYU 44 -2.5 46 31-24 W W O 63 1.9 326 6.3 4 189 3.9 153 4.1 210/18/14 TULANE 29 -17 44.5 20-13 W L U 94 2.5 139 5.8 4 131 3.6 147 3.5 210/25/14 TEMPLE 37 -6 46 34-14 W W O 130 2.8 336 8.6 2 32 1.5 150 4.2 411/1/14 at CONNECTICUT 23 -8 37.5 29-37 L L O 145 3.9 284 6.8 4 179 4.5 148 5.3 111/14/14 TULSA 27 -19.5 54.5 31-7 W W U 215 4.1 291 10.0 2 129 4.8 72 2.5 311/22/14 SMU 18 -28 48.5 53-7 W W O 236 4.0 254 9.8 2 66 3.3 50 2.3 511/28/14 at SOUTH FLORIDA 29 -10 42.5 16-0 W W U 145 3.2 150 5.2 3 5 0.2 195 5.0 012/4/14 at EAST CAROLINA 44 +6.5 55 32-30 W W O 148 3.7 274 8.3 1 14 0.5 397 8.1 3



(225) NC STATE [SU:7-5 | ATS:7-5]

Head Coach: Dave Doeren • Conference: ACC

(226) UCF (-1.5 | 49.5) [SU:9-3 | ATS:8-4]Head Coach: George O’Leary • Conference: The American


NC State 49 49.5

UCF -2.5 -1.5


39

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


39


TROPICANA FIELD (TAMPA, FL)

• UCF is 9-2 ATS(L3Y) - Against decent offensive teams averaging more than 5.7 yards per play(CS)

• NC STATE is 4-10-1 ATS(L3Y) - Against decent passing teams averaging more than 7.5 yards per attempt(CS)

• NC STATE is 8-2 UNDER(L5Y) - Against shutdown passing defenses yielding less than 5.9 yards per attempt(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?225 NC STATE 49.5 43 26.8 OVER 26.2 27.0 OVER226 UCF -1.5 45 -2.8 28.9 23.6 28.0

RECENT NC STATE BOWL GAME LOG RECENT UCF BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/31/05 SOUTH FLORIDA (Belk) 14-0 W -3.5 W 41U 12/29/07 MISSISSIPPI ST (Liberty) 3-10 L -3 L 52.5U12/29/08 RUTGERS (Birmingham) 23-29 L 6 T 57.5U 12/19/09 RUTGERS (St Peterburg) 24-45 L 2.5 L 45O12/28/10 WEST VIRGINIA (Champs Sports) 23-7 W 3 W 49.5U 12/31/10 GEORGIA (Liberty) 10-6 W 7 W 53.5U12/27/11 LOUISVILLE (Belk) 31-24 W -1.5 W 44O 12/21/12 BALL ST (St Peterburg) 38-17 W -7 W 60U12/31/12 VANDERBILT (Music City) 24-38 L 7.5 L 54O 1/1/14 BAYLOR (Fiesta) 52-42 W 17 W 74.5O

RECENT NC STATE BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT UCF BOWL GAME TRENDS* NC STATE is on a run of 5-2 SU & 5-1-1 ATS in bowl games * UCF is on 3-game SU & ATS bowl winning streak* FAVORITES are 6-1 SU & 5-1-1 ATS in NCST bowl games since '03 * UNDERDOGS are 4-2 ATS in UCF's prior six bowl games* NC STATE is 6-2 OVER the total as a bowl game underdog * UCF is playing in 3rd St Petersburg Bowl game since '09

The Knights will have home-state advantage in this Bitcoin St. Petersburg Bowl matchup. Two previous meetings were tight and resulted in road upsets: The Wolfpack won 28-21 as 3-point dogs in 2010, and the Knights won 25-23 as 7.5-point dogs in 2007. George O’Leary is 3-3 SU in bowls at UCF, winning his last three. Dave Doeren is 1-0 SU/ATS in bowls.

The Beef O’Brady’s St. Petersburg Bowl is played at the Tampa Bay Rays’ Tropicana Field, a stadium not exactly renowned in the world of sports. This year’s matchup marks the seventh installment of this bowl series and while UCF makes a third appearance, NC State is here for the first time. UCF is the designated (and regional) home team and that could prove important, as the team with that designation is a perfect 6-0 SU & ATS in the history of this series. Favorites are also 5-1 SU & ATS, winning each time by double-digit margins. The Knights were a slight favorite at presstime. For those of you interested in totals, consider that three straight games have gone UNDER the posted number.

Consensus says: This is another game where our experts didn’t get a whole lot of buzz out of the line or total when it was released. In all, the consensus group had a slight lean to UCF with a 4-3 margin, and a similar lean to UNDER. UCF is playing within an hour or so of its campus, so is the designated and regional home team and that could prove important, as the team with that designation is a perfect 6-0 SU & ATS in the history of this series. The Knights are also a slight favorite, and the chalk boasts a record of 5-1 SU & ATS, winning each time by double-digit margins. In terms of the total, both teams played pretty solid defense down the stretch, and in fact, the Knights held three of their final four opponents to 7 points or less.

RECENT ST PETERBURG BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/19/09 RUTGERS (BEAST) 45 UCF (CUSA) 24 -2.5 45 RUTGERS (BEAST) RUTGERS (BEAST) FAV FAV OVER12/21/10 LOUISVILLE (BEAST) 31 SOUTHERN MISS (CUSA) 28 -2 58.5 LOUISVILLE (BEAST) LOUISVILLE (BEAST) FAV FAV OVER12/20/11 FLA INTERNATIONAL (SBC)10 MARSHALL (CUSA) 20 -4 48.5 MARSHALL (CUSA) MARSHALL (CUSA) DOG DOG UNDER12/21/12 UCF (CUSA) 38 BALL ST (MAC) 17 -7 60 UCF (CUSA) UCF (CUSA) FAV FAV UNDER12/23/13 EAST CAROLINA (CUSA) 37 OHIO U (MAC) 20 -14 63.5 EAST CAROLINA (CUSA) EAST CAROLINA (CUSA) FAV FAV UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Friday, December 26, 2014 - (225) NC STATE vs. (226) UCF (-1.5)NC State NC State UCF UCF UCF UCF NC State UCF

Friday, December 26, 2014 - (225) NC STATE vs. (226) UCF - TOTAL (49.5)UNDER UNDER UNDER* UNDER OVER OVER OVER UNDER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


40




This bowl battles will feature a stunning contrast. With Gunner Kiel at the helm, Cincinnati has the far superior passing game and averaged 90 more yards of offense than Virginia Tech. The Hokies defense finished 17th nationally, which is remarkable given the turnovers the offense committed and their defense allowed 115 fewer yards than the Bearcats. As the season progressed, it was obvious why Michael Brewer was not able to become the starting signal caller at Texas Tech. Brewer stared down receivers and when pressured, would heave jump balls ripe for picking. The Hokies defense will get a stern test from a Cincy offense that moves the pigskin. The Bearcats defense looked to be improving late in the season until Houston hung almost 600 yards on them. Virginia Tech is nowhere near that explosive, thus it should help this bunch. Watch for both teams to blitz frequently to see how quarterbacks react.

MILITARY BOWL • 1:00 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 27, 2014

VIRGINIA TECH 23.3 20 38-142 [3.7] 36-21-225 [6.3] 15.8 20.4 16 38-145 [3.9] 29-14-187 [6.5] 16.3 -6 +2.9 CINCINNATI 35.4 24 35-158 [4.5] 38-23-300 [7.9] 12.9 26.8 22 38-181 [4.8] 36-22-266 [7.4] 16.7 +4 +8.6 VIRGINIA TECH 21.0 18 41-115 [2.8] 32-19-188 [5.8] 14.4 16.2 18 39-132 [3.4] 31-15-177 [5.6] 19.1 +3 +4.8 CINCINNATI 32.7 21 35-162 [4.6] 35-21-256 [7.2] 12.8 21.3 21 36-184 [5.1] 32-20-213 [6.5] 18.6 +4 +11.4

VIRGINIA TECH 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 WILLIAM & MARY 24 -22 44 34-9 W W U 222 5.3 266 8.6 2 76 2.7 117 5.1 29/6/14 at OHIO ST 62 +10 46.5 35-21 W W O 121 3.0 199 5.5 3 108 2.7 219 7.6 39/13/14 EAST CAROLINA 44 -10 53.5 21-28 L L U 91 2.8 298 5.3 2 75 3.0 427 9.1 19/20/14 GEORGIA TECH 56 -8 51.5 24-27 L L U 127 3.8 297 7.6 3 250 5.7 125 6.9 19/27/14 W MICHIGAN 37 -20.5 50 35-17 W L O 308 6.6 178 5.6 2 19 0.8 212 6.4 210/4/14 at NORTH CAROLINA 43 -2.5 57.5 34-17 W W U 171 3.0 186 6.9 1 125 4.3 198 5.4 310/16/14 at PITTSBURGH 45 -1 45.5 16-21 L L U 26 1.2 265 5.9 1 210 4.9 121 6.7 210/23/14 MIAMI FL 47 +2.5 47.5 6-30 L L U 120 3.9 142 5.1 3 364 6.9 92 5.8 011/1/14 BOSTON COLLEGE 46 -3 40 31-33 L L O 69 2.4 345 7.0 1 258 5.5 110 7.3 011/15/14 at DUKE 44 +3.5 47.5 17-16 W W U 145 3.0 148 6.2 1 141 3.4 185 4.5 311/22/14 at WAKE FOREST 29 -13.5 38 3-6 L L U 111 2.8 143 4.9 3 74 1.8 160 5.0 111/28/14 VIRGINIA 46 +2 37.5 24-20 W W O 198 5.0 235 6.7 3 38 1.1 276 7.3 1CINCINNATI 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO9/12/14 vs. TOLEDO 39 -9.5 58 58-34 W W O 148 4.9 436 10.4 0 240 6.2 323 7.5 19/20/14 vs. MIAMI OHIO 23 -30 61.5 31-24 W L U 99 3.3 271 6.9 2 102 2.3 262 10.1 39/27/14 at OHIO ST 62 +17 60.5 28-50 L L O 70 3.7 352 10.7 0 380 5.8 330 9.2 110/4/14 vs. MEMPHIS 47 -3 62.5 14-41 L L U 97 3.9 255 6.4 2 299 4.3 311 12.4 010/11/14 at MIAMI FL 47 +15.5 66 34-55 L L O 67 2.3 355 5.9 3 335 9.6 286 11.4 110/18/14 at SMU 18 -12.5 62 41-3 W W U 240 5.2 268 9.9 0 98 4.1 178 4.8 410/24/14 SOUTH FLORIDA 29 -10 60 34-17 W W U 273 5.5 317 8.6 3 42 1.9 239 7.2 410/31/14 at TULANE 29 -4 56.5 38-14 W W U 265 7.6 214 8.2 3 175 5.3 205 5.9 111/13/14 EAST CAROLINA 44 +1 71.5 54-46 W W O 150 4.5 436 9.7 4 154 4.8 418 6.7 211/22/14 at CONNECTICUT 23 -9.5 55.5 41-0 W W U 249 5.2 176 4.9 1 48 1.8 81 3.0 311/29/14 at TEMPLE 37 -7 58 14-6 W W U 81 2.5 174 5.6 1 71 2.2 196 5.6 212/6/14 HOUSTON 41 -7 57 38-31 W T O 152 3.5 348 9.2 0 234 6.7 360 8.0 1



(227) VIRGINIA TECH [SU:6-6 | ATS:5-7]

Head Coach: Frank Beamer • Conference: ACC

(228) CINCINNATI (-2.5 | 51) [SU:9-3 | ATS:7-4-1]Head Coach: Tommy Tuberville • Conference: The American


Virginia Tech 49 51

Cincinnati -3.5 -2.5


41

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


41


NAVY-MARINE CORPS MEMORIAL STADIUM (ANNAPOLIS, MD)

• CINCINNATI is 10-4 ATS(L3Y) - Against inefficient offenses averaging more than 15.3 yards per point(CS)

• VIRGINIA TECH is 5-14-1 ATS(L3Y) - Against decent offensive teams averaging more than 5.7 yards per play(CS)

• CINCINNATI is 11-1 UNDER(L5Y) - Against lesser passing teams averaging less than 6.5 yards per attempt(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?227 VIRGINIA TECH 51 43 26.9 29.1 OVER 32.8 VT228 CINCINNATI -2.5 47 -4.3 27.8 29.0 21.9

RECENT VIRGINIA TECH BOWL GAME LOG RECENT CINCINNATI BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/31/09 TENNESSEE (Chick-Fil-A Peach) 37-14 W -5 W 48O 1/1/09 VIRGINIA TECH (Orange) 7-20 L -2.5 L 41U1/3/11 STANFORD (Orange) 12-40 L 3.5 L 58.5U 1/1/10 FLORIDA (Sugar) 24-51 L 12 L 59O1/3/12 MICHIGAN (Sugar) 20-23 L 3 T 52U 12/31/11 VANDERBILT (Liberty) 31-24 W 2 W 50.5O12/28/12 RUTGERS (Russell Athletic) 13-10 W 1 W 42U 12/27/12 DUKE (Belk) 48-34 W -8.5 W 62.5O12/31/13 UCLA (Sun) 12-42 L 7 L 45.5O 12/28/13 NORTH CAROLINA (Belk) 17-39 L 2.5 L 59.5U

RECENT VIRGINIA TECH BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT CINCINNATI BOWL GAME TRENDS* UNDERDOGS are 7-4-1 ATS in L12 VIRGINIA TECH bowl games * CINCINNATI is just 5-6 SU & 3-8 ATS in L11 bowl games* UNDER the total is 5-2 in L7 VIRGINIA TECH bowl games * CINCINNATI lost to Virginia Tech 20-7 in 2009 Orange Bowl* HOKIES are 5-1 UNDER the total as bowl games dogs or pick em' * Three of L4 CINCINNATI bowl games went OVER the total

Underdogs are 3-0 ATS in this series that will continue in the Military Bowl in Annapolis. The Bearcats won 27-24 as 6-point dogs in 2012. The Hokies pulled a 20-7 upset as 2.5-point dogs in the 2009 New Year’s Day Orange Bowl. Frank Beamer’s consecutive bowl run extends to 22 in a row, but he has slipped to 9-12 SU with a 1-3 SU slide.

Ironically, with the Military Bowl series entering its seventh season, only twice has a team out of the military been represented. This is the second straight time that the game will be played in Annapolis, home of the Navy. Cincinnati was about a field goal favorite to open, and that is noteworthy, since favorites are on a run of 6-0 SU & 5-1 ATS in the contest. Also, the first five games of this bowl series went OVER the total, and bettors were pulling for a sixth straight OVER a year ago after moving the opening total of 59 all the way up to 64. However, Marshall got surprisingly defensive in the game and beat Maryland 31-20. Only one of the past six games was decided by less than 9 points.

Jim says: Virginia Tech as a recent history of not showing up offensively for bowl games, as the Hokies have scored just 14.3 PPG. Three of those games were expected to be rough and tumble affairs played close to the vest. In this one, their offense is going to have to show up, and Cincinnati and QB Gunner Kiel have been on fire, scoring 37.1 PPG during their current 7-game winning streak. Tech did score 31.3 PPG in non-conference play this season, including 35 on Ohio State, so it is capable of lighting up the scoreboard. Five of the L6 games in the Military Bowl series went OVER the total. Look for that to go to six out of seven this year.

RECENT MILITARY BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/29/09 UCLA (P12) 30 TEMPLE (MAC) 21 -4.5 44 UCLA (P12) UCLA (P12) FAV FAV OVER12/29/10 MARYLAND (ACC) 51 EAST CAROLINA (CUSA) 20 -8 70.5 MARYLAND (ACC) MARYLAND (ACC) FAV FAV OVER12/28/11 TOLEDO (MAC) 42 AIR FORCE (MWC) 41 -3 68.5 TOLEDO (MAC) AIR FORCE (MWC) FAV DOG OVER12/27/12 SAN JOSE ST (WAC) 29 BOWLING GREEN (MAC) 20 -7 46 SAN JOSE ST (WAC) SAN JOSE ST (WAC) FAV FAV OVER12/27/13 MARSHALL (CUSA) 31 MARYLAND (ACC) 20 -2.5 64 MARSHALL (CUSA) MARSHALL (CUSA) FAV FAV UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Saturday, December 27, 2014 - (227) VIRGINIA TECH vs. (228) CINCINNATI (-2.5)Cincinnati Cincinnati Cincinnati Cincinnati Cincinnati Virginia Tech Virginia Tech Cincinnati

Saturday, December 27, 2014 - (227) VIRGINIA TECH vs. (228) CINCINNATI - TOTAL (51)OVER* OVER UNDER OVER OVER OVER OVER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


42




Arizona State only had two returning starters on defense, but this unit gelled quicker than most expected and the Sun Devils were in the thick of the Pac-12 race. However, those players faded in November and Arizona State fell to Oregon State and Arizona, sending them to El Paso. The defense should be better with the time off, but coach Todd Graham will have to decide on who he wants to start at quarterback with a struggling Taylor Kelly or backup Mike Bercovici. It is a testament to coach David Cutcliffe that Duke suffering two November losses to finish 9-3 (8-4 ATS) was thought to be a “disappointment”. The Blue Devils seemingly accomplished their record with mirrors since they were actually outgained by two YPG on the season despite the nine wins. Expect this Sun Bowl to come down to which defense surrenders the fewest big plays since both can be beaten.

SUN BOWL • 2:00 PM ET (CBS) – DEC 27, 2014

DUKE 32.5 22 37-183 [4.9] 37-21-215 [5.9] 12.2 20.6 22 44-196 [4.5] 32-18-204 [6.3] 19.4 +8 +11.9 ARIZONA ST (15) 37.0 23 39-170 [4.3] 36-21-276 [7.7] 12.1 27.7 20 39-157 [4.0] 35-21-262 [7.5] 15.1 +12 +9.3

DUKE 30.6 21 35-156 [4.5] 37-21-201 [5.5] 11.7 24.4 23 46-224 [4.8] 30-18-201 [6.7] 17.4 +3 +6.2 ARIZONA ST 36.7 21 37-166 [4.5] 34-19-270 [7.9] 11.9 28.0 21 44-197 [4.5] 32-20-219 [6.9] 14.9 +7 +8.7

DUKE 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 ELON 11 -38 59 52-13 W W O 275 6.3 292 7.0 0 138 4.5 190 5.0 09/6/14 at TROY 19 -18 64 34-17 W L U 182 4.4 270 6.4 0 158 3.7 238 7.0 09/13/14 KANSAS 34 -11 56.5 41-3 W W U 331 9.2 180 5.1 0 202 4.3 95 3.3 29/20/14 TULANE 29 -16.5 53.5 47-13 W W O 256 6.1 181 6.5 2 231 4.0 160 4.4 59/27/14 at MIAMI FL 47 +4 59 10-22 L L U 85 3.4 179 3.5 3 203 5.0 223 6.6 210/11/14 at GEORGIA TECH 56 +3.5 58.5 31-25 W W U 242 5.1 131 5.0 0 282 6.1 201 7.7 310/18/14 VIRGINIA 46 -3 49 20-13 W W U 155 5.2 179 4.7 0 140 4.5 325 6.9 111/1/14 at PITTSBURGH 45 +3.5 52.5 51-48 W W O 172 6.4 266 8.6 0 358 5.5 236 9.8 011/8/14 at SYRACUSE 37 -3.5 53 27-10 W W U 98 3.0 161 4.9 1 119 3.2 105 3.3 211/15/14 VIRGINIA TECH 43 -3.5 47.5 16-17 L L U 141 3.4 185 4.5 3 145 3.0 148 6.2 111/20/14 NORTH CAROLINA 43 -5 67 20-45 L L U 116 3.1 262 6.6 3 315 5.5 276 10.2 311/29/14 WAKE FOREST 29 -17.5 44 41-21 W W O 146 3.2 293 9.2 1 64 2.7 251 7.0 2ARIZONA ST 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/28/14 WEBER ST 15 -46 65.5 45-14 W L U 267 5.9 303 7.8 0 152 4.8 156 5.4 09/6/14 at NEW MEXICO 27 -25 66.5 58-23 W W O 423 8.8 198 9.4 1 207 3.6 130 11.8 39/13/14 at COLORADO 37 -15.5 68.5 38-24 W L U 223 6.4 203 8.1 0 232 6.3 313 5.8 39/25/14 UCLA 54 +3.5 64.5 27-62 L L O 138 3.8 488 7.1 4 225 6.4 355 15.4 010/4/14 at USC 55 +11.5 67.5 38-34 W W O 31 1.4 510 11.1 0 220 4.4 273 6.1 010/18/14 STANFORD 56 +3.5 53.5 26-10 W W U 114 2.5 242 7.1 0 76 3.5 212 5.4 210/25/14 at WASHINGTON 50 -3.5 60.5 24-10 W W U 105 2.4 180 7.2 1 151 3.3 139 5.3 311/1/14 UTAH 46 -6.5 56 19-16 W L U 239 5.6 205 6.2 2 184 3.5 57 2.6 011/8/14 NOTRE DAME 47 -3 61 55-31 W W O 188 4.2 224 8.0 1 41 1.1 446 10.9 511/15/14 at OREGON ST 41 -7 63 27-35 L L U 103 3.3 264 6.0 2 247 6.7 251 7.6 211/22/14 WASHINGTON ST 40 -14 71 52-31 W W O 98 2.7 232 9.3 0 21 0.9 601 7.9 511/28/14 at ARIZONA 53 +1.5 65 35-42 L L O 113 2.6 267 6.1 2 125 3.4 208 9.9 2



(229) DUKE [SU:9-3 | ATS:8-4]

Head Coach: David Cutcliffe • Conference: ACC

(230) ARIZONA ST (-7 | 66.5) [SU:9-3 | ATS:6-6]Head Coach: Todd Graham • Conference: Pac-12


Duke 59.5 66.5

Arizona St -8.5 -7


43

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


43


SUN BOWL (EL PASO, TX)

• DUKE is 8-2 ATS(L5Y) - On non-grass field• ARIZONA ST is 3-6 ATS(S2000) - In December Bowl Games• ARIZONA ST is 9-2 OVER(L2Y) - Against decent rushing teams averaging more than 4.4 yards per

carry(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?229 DUKE 66.5 44 27.1 UNDER 28.2 UNDER 24.7 230 ARIZONA ST -7 54 -9.8 31.9 33.2 39.5 ASU

RECENT DUKE BOWL GAME LOG RECENT ARIZONA ST BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

1/2/61 ARKANSAS (Cotton) 7-6 W - - - 12/24/06 HAWAII (Hawaii) 24-41 L 8.5 L 72.5U12/28/89 TEXAS TECH (All American) 21-49 L -3 L - 12/27/07 TEXAS (Holiday) 34-52 L 1 L 62.5O1/2/95 WISCONSIN (Outback) 20-34 L 8.5 L 53O 12/22/11 BOISE ST (Las Vegas) 24-56 L 14 L 65O12/27/12 CINCINNATI (Belk) 34-48 L 8.5 L 62.5O 12/29/12 NAVY (San Francisco) 62-28 W -12 W 55O12/31/13 TEXAS A&M (Chick-Fil-A Peach) 48-52 L 13.5 W 75.5O 12/30/13 TEXAS TECH (Holiday) 23-37 L -17 L 72U

RECENT DUKE BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT ARIZONA ST BOWL GAME TRENDS* DUKE hasn't won a bowl game since '61, going 0-4 SU & 1-3 ATS since * ARIZONA ST is on a 1-5 ATS slide in bowl games* All three prior DUKE bowl games with totals went OVER * FAVORITES are on a 4-1 SU & ATS run in ASU bowl games* DUKE has allowed 45.8 PPG in L4 bowl games * SUN DEVILS have allowed >=23 points in L10 bowl games (36.5 PPG)

The Sun Bowl in El Paso gets these two 9-3 teams that have never met. ASU’s Todd Graham had won four bowls in a row until last year’s 37-23 upset loss to Texas Tech in the Holiday Bowl. David Cutcliffe is 0-2 SU in bowls at Duke -- including a 2013 New Year’s Eve loss to Texas A&M -- after a 4-1 SU run at Mississippi.

It has been 54 years since Duke won a bowl game. Perhaps the annual Sun Bowl in El Paso, TX is where that happens. If history is an indication it’s possible, as this bowl series is one most defined by underdog success. Despite UCLA hammering Virginia Tech last December, dogs are still an incredible 15-3-1 ATS since ‘94. The Blue Devils are more than a TD underdog for this contest, but recall that they gave Texas A&M a serious run for the money as 13.5-point underdogs in last year’s Chick-Fil-A Bowl. The secret to underdog success in this game has been their ability to score, and that is reflected in a trend that shows 10 of the L13 games going OVER the total.

Jim says: With as good as the Pac 12 has been in bowl games in recent years, you are going to have to find a much better opponent than Duke for me against Arizona State. The Pac 12 has really opened my eyes in bowl games recently, boasting a record of 16-7 ATS as a favorite overall, as well as a mark of 7-1 SU & 6-2 ATS in its L8 versus the ACC. Simply put, I don’t think the ACC teams have the explosiveness offensively to match up with the speed and athleticism of the teams out west. If there’s one thing that ASU does have, it’s speed. I am also a big QB Taylor Kelly fan. He and the Sun Devils will have a huge day against Duke in El Paso.

RECENT SUN BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/31/09 OKLAHOMA (B12) 31 STANFORD (P12) 27 -11 54.5 OKLAHOMA (B12) STANFORD (P12) FAV DOG OVER12/31/10 MIAMI FL (ACC) 17 NOTRE DAME (IND) 33 -3 48 NOTRE DAME (IND) NOTRE DAME (IND) DOG DOG OVER12/31/11 GEORGIA TECH (ACC) 27 UTAH (P12) 30 -1.5 49 UTAH (P12) UTAH (P12) DOG DOG OVER12/31/12 USC (P12) 7 GEORGIA TECH (ACC) 21 -7 63.5 GEORGIA TECH (ACC) GEORGIA TECH (ACC) DOG DOG UNDER12/31/13 UCLA (P12) 42 VIRGINIA TECH (ACC) 12 -7 45.5 UCLA (P12) UCLA (P12) FAV FAV OVER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Saturday, December 27, 2014 - (229) DUKE vs. (230) ARIZONA ST (-7)Arizona St* Arizona St Arizona St Duke Arizona St Duke Arizona St Duke

Saturday, December 27, 2014 - (229) DUKE vs. (230) ARIZONA ST - TOTAL (66.5)OVER OVER* OVER* OVER UNDER UNDER UNDER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


44




This bowl features two 6-6 teams in which significantly more was expected. Miami was sitting at 6-3, with the trio of defeats on the road against solid bowl participants. The Hurricanes took Florida State to the wire before falling and let one loss turn into three against both Virginia and Pittsburgh. Miami does have a fine signal caller in Brad Kaaya and RB Duke Johnson is All-ACC performer. South Carolina opened No. 9 in the preseason polls and never was close to those expectations. The Gamecocks lost twice late with leads in the fourth quarter, which squared their record. After being among the better defensive teams in the country the past few seasons, the Gamecocks slipped to 90th in total defense and was especially vulnerable to the run at 214.4 YPG allowed (107th). With Steve Spurrier returning, this is springboard game heading into next season for South Carolina.

INDEPENDENCE BOWL • 3:30 PM ET (ESPN2) – DEC 27, 2014

MIAMI FL 29.9 20 34-180 [5.3] 30-17-251 [8.4] 14.4 24.3 19 39-143 [3.7] 30-17-184 [6.1] 13.5 +1 +5.6 SOUTH CAROLINA 33.3 24 37-169 [4.5] 36-21-281 [7.8] 13.5 31.2 23 39-214 [5.4] 30-19-219 [7.4] 13.9 -4 +2.1 MIAMI FL 20.8 18 29-136 [4.7] 29-18-227 [7.8] 17.5 27.2 20 47-221 [4.7] 20-14-132 [6.5] 13.0 -2 -6.4 SOUTH CAROLINA 32.2 25 37-154 [4.1] 41-24-271 [6.5] 13.2 35.2 20 40-247 [6.1] 20-14-183 [9.0] 12.2 -3 -3.0

MIAMI FL 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO9/1/14 at LOUISVILLE 52 +4.5 55 13-31 L L U 70 2.6 174 6.0 3 130 3.0 206 7.4 29/6/14 FLORIDA AM 10 -45 59 41-7 W L U 198 6.0 218 7.3 3 25 0.8 89 5.2 29/13/14 ARKANSAS ST 34 -14 52 41-20 W W O 146 4.2 342 13.2 2 93 2.0 236 5.6 29/20/14 at NEBRASKA 50 +8 54 31-41 L L O 76 3.3 359 8.5 3 343 6.4 113 8.7 29/27/14 DUKE 44 -4 59 22-10 W W U 203 5.0 223 6.6 2 85 3.4 179 3.5 310/4/14 at GEORGIA TECH 56 +1.5 58 17-28 L L U 107 5.6 245 9.8 2 318 4.9 53 7.6 010/11/14 CINCINNATI 47 -15.5 66 55-34 W W O 335 9.6 286 11.4 1 67 2.3 355 5.9 310/23/14 at VIRGINIA TECH 43 -2.5 47.5 30-6 W W U 364 6.9 92 5.8 0 120 3.9 142 5.1 311/1/14 NORTH CAROLINA 43 -17 67.5 47-20 W W U 295 6.0 199 10.5 1 6 0.2 252 6.6 211/15/14 FLORIDA ST 58 +2 62 26-30 L L U 176 4.4 316 9.3 3 114 6.0 304 7.2 311/22/14 at VIRGINIA 46 -4 45 13-30 L L U 64 2.8 263 8.0 2 195 4.5 146 5.8 111/29/14 PITTSBURGH 45 -11 55.5 23-35 L L O 125 4.5 296 6.6 0 226 4.8 134 11.2 0SOUTH CAROLINA 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/28/14 TEXAS A&M 50 -9 60.5 28-52 L L O 67 3.0 366 9.2 1 169 4.3 511 8.5 09/6/14 EAST CAROLINA 44 -14.5 65 33-23 W L U 175 4.6 266 7.0 1 132 6.3 321 7.0 29/13/14 GEORGIA 61 +6.5 58 38-35 W W O 176 4.2 271 9.0 2 217 5.7 191 8.7 09/20/14 at VANDERBILT 30 -22.5 51 48-34 W L O 212 6.2 237 7.0 1 156 5.2 223 8.9 29/27/14 MISSOURI 52 -6.5 61 20-21 L L U 119 2.8 219 5.9 0 148 4.1 132 3.9 010/4/14 at KENTUCKY 43 -5 55 38-45 L L O 282 5.9 218 5.9 3 239 6.6 208 6.9 110/18/14 FURMAN 15 -38 56 41-10 W L U 267 6.2 281 10.0 2 211 5.4 91 4.8 310/25/14 at AUBURN 60 +18 62.5 35-42 L W O 119 3.6 416 7.8 3 395 8.4 156 10.4 111/1/14 TENNESSEE 49 -6 55 42-45 L L O 248 6.4 377 11.1 1 344 6.3 301 7.5 111/15/14 at FLORIDA 53 +6.5 57 23-20 W W U 95 2.5 206 4.9 1 218 4.4 60 5.5 111/22/14 S ALABAMA 28 -24 56.5 37-12 W W U 210 5.7 244 12.2 5 119 2.7 170 5.0 511/29/14 at CLEMSON 53 +4.5 53 17-35 L L U 63 1.9 276 6.7 1 225 5.6 266 12.7 1



(231) MIAMI FL (-3.5 | 61.5) [SU:6-6 | ATS:5-7]

Head Coach: Al Golden • Conference: ACC

(232) SOUTH CAROLINA [SU:6-6 | ATS:4-8]Head Coach: Steve Spurrier • Conference: SEC


Miami FL 59.5 -3.5

South Carolina -1.5 61.5


45

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


45


INDEPENDENCE STADIUM (SHREVEPORT, LA)

• MIAMI FL is 14-5 ATS(L5Y) - as favorite of 7 or less points• SOUTH CAROLINA is 3-8 ATS(L2Y) - Against inefficient defenses allowing less than 15.3 yards per

point(CS)• SOUTH CAROLINA is 8-2 OVER(L5Y) - Against elite rushing teams averaging more than 5.0 yards

per carry(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?231 MIAMI FL -3.5 47 31.3 33.8 MIA 26.7 UNDER232 SOUTH CAROLINA 61.5 50 -3 SC 28.2 24.7 28.8 SC

RECENT MIAMI FL BOWL GAME LOG RECENT SOUTH CAROLINA BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/31/06 NEVADA (Humanitarian) 21-20 W -4 L 43.5U 1/2/10 CONNECTICUT (Birmingham) 7-20 L -4 L 50.5U12/27/08 CALIFORNIA (San Francisco) 17-24 L 10 W 51U 12/31/10 FLORIDA ST (Chick-Fil-A Peach) 17-26 L -2 L 53.5U12/29/09 WISCONSIN (Champs Sports) 14-20 L -3.5 L 55.5U 1/2/12 NEBRASKA (Capital One) 30-13 W -3 W 45U12/31/10 NOTRE DAME (Sun) 17-33 L -3 L 48O 1/1/13 MICHIGAN (Outback) 33-28 W -5.5 L 47.5O12/28/13 LOUISVILLE (Russell Athletic) 9-36 L 5.5 L 60U 1/1/14 WISCONSIN (Capital One) 34-24 W 1.5 W 51.5O

RECENT MIAMI FL BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT SOUTH CAROLINA BOWL GAME TRENDS* MIAMI is just 1-5 SU & ATS in its L6 bowl games * UNDERDOGS are 8-3 ATS in SOUTH CAROLINA's L11 bowl games* UNDERDOGS are 6-4 SU & 8-2 ATS in L10 MIAMI bowl games * GAMECOCKS have won three straight bowl games, going 2-1 ATS* UNDER the total is 4-1 in L5 HURRICANES' bowl games * SOUTH CAROLINA is 2-4 ATS in L6 as bowl game favorite

These two disappointing 6-6 teams meet in the Independence Bowl. Miami holds an 8-5-2 SU series advantage, but the teams haven’t met since 1987 and 13 of those match-ups came between 1936-60. Steve Spurrier has won his last three bowl games, but is 3-3 SU at South Carolina and 10-10 SU overall. Al Golden is 0-2 SU in bowls.

Although there are plenty of other matchups between the two leagues on the 2014 bowl slate, a matchup between ACC & SEC is a first for the Independence Bowl. In fact, this game has changed significantly over the years to where conference representative have varied greatly. Last year it was the Pac 12’s Arizona whipping Boston College of the ACC, 42-19. That results was noteworthy in a couple of ways as some distinctive trends were carried on. First off, favorites have been dominant, boasting a record of 9-2 SU & ATS since ’03. Secondly, it was the third straight outright & ATS loss in the game for the ACC, despite enjoying a sizeable regional edge all three times. This year there is very little regional edge but Miami is the favorite.

Paul says: South Carolina was flipped from a favorite to an underdog largely because of the substantial edge Miami has the on the defensive side of the ball (328 yards allowed vs. 434 for South Carolina). One factor that caught my attention was the offenses. The Gamecocks have somewhat better overall numbers, but what caught my eye is when both teams played on the road. South Carolina averaged 33.3 PPG in all contests and barely dipped to 32.2 PPG on the road. The Hurricanes on the other hand went from 36.4 PPG at home to 20.8 PPG on the road, which led to them being 1-4 SU and ATS on the road. South Carolina outright!

RECENT INDEPENDENCE BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/28/09 GEORGIA (SEC) 44 TEXAS A&M (B12) 20 -6 65.5 GEORGIA (SEC) GEORGIA (SEC) FAV FAV UNDER12/27/10 AIR FORCE (MWC) 14 GEORGIA TECH (ACC) 7 -3 55 AIR FORCE (MWC) AIR FORCE (MWC) FAV FAV UNDER12/26/11 MISSOURI (B12) 41 NORTH CAROLINA (ACC) 24 -4.5 54 MISSOURI (B12) MISSOURI (B12) FAV FAV OVER12/28/12 LA MONROE (SBC) 14 OHIO U (MAC) 45 -6.5 59 OHIO U (MAC) OHIO U (MAC) DOG DOG Tie12/31/13 ARIZONA (P12) 42 BOSTON COLLEGE (ACC) 19 -7 57.5 ARIZONA (P12) ARIZONA (P12) FAV FAV OVER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Saturday, December 27, 2014 - (231) MIAMI FL vs. (232) SOUTH CAROLINA (+3.5)South Carolina South Carolina* South Carolina* South Carolina* South Carolina South Carolina South Carolina South Carolina

Saturday, December 27, 2014 - (231) MIAMI FL vs. (232) SOUTH CAROLINA - TOTAL (61.5)OVER* UNDER* UNDER UNDER* UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


46




This might not be the most exciting bowl battle of the season, but bettors will still have to make a decision. In overlooking Boston College’s schedule which led to a 7-5 (8-4 ATS) record, they were 6-2 (5-3 ATS) when favored or receiving three or less points. This proved they basically won when they should have or fared well against the competition when they had similar talent to the Eagles. Boston College will be in that situation in this contest with Penn State. If you have not seen QB Tyler Murphy, he’s an electrifying athlete who’s a descent thrower. For the Nittany Lions, the lull between their last game and this matchup is finding five offensive linemen who can block and restoring the confidence of QB Christian Hackenberg, who was a shell of his former self. Expect a hard-nosed affair with the quarterback who performs better to be your winner.

PINSTRIPE BOWL • 4:30 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 27, 2014

PENN ST 19.8 19 35-104 [2.9] 37-20-222 [6.0] 16.5 17.7 14 33-85 [2.6] 32-17-185 [5.8] 15.3 -3 +2.1 BOSTON COLLEGE 25.9 19 49-252 [5.1] 19-10-132 [7.1] 14.8 20.5 17 31-95 [3.1] 31-19-218 [7.0] 15.3 -1 +5.4 PENN ST 15.8 18 36-102 [2.8] 34-20-237 [7.0] 21.5 15.0 13 32-82 [2.6] 30-16-178 [6.0] 17.3 +1 +0.8 BOSTON COLLEGE 26.6 20 52-270 [5.2] 17-11-124 [7.3] 14.8 17.8 16 28-59 [2.1] 33-20-238 [7.3] 16.7 +3 +8.8

PENN ST 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 vs. UCF 45 +2 43.5 26-24 W W O 57 2.0 454 9.7 3 24 0.8 222 10.1 19/6/14 AKRON 29 -14 50.5 21-3 W W U 106 3.4 319 8.6 3 69 2.8 208 4.5 09/13/14 at RUTGERS 38 -3.5 52 13-10 W L U 64 1.9 309 7.0 1 102 3.3 192 6.2 59/20/14 MASSACHUSETTS 23 -27 48.5 48-7 W W O 228 5.1 236 7.4 0 3 0.1 263 8.0 19/27/14 NORTHWESTERN 40 -10 47 6-29 L L U 50 2.0 216 4.7 2 103 2.7 258 7.0 110/11/14 at MICHIGAN 42 +2.5 41.5 13-18 L L U 54 1.5 160 4.8 1 64 2.1 192 7.4 110/25/14 OHIO ST 62 +14 52.5 24-31 L W O 16 0.5 224 4.5 2 219 3.8 74 3.9 211/1/14 MARYLAND 42 -3 43.5 19-20 L L U 42 1.0 177 4.2 4 35 1.2 161 4.2 211/8/14 at INDIANA 34 -6 44.5 13-7 W T U 162 4.4 168 5.8 2 153 3.8 68 2.4 211/15/14 TEMPLE 37 -10.5 40 30-13 W W O 254 5.4 112 4.3 3 61 3.1 187 4.9 511/22/14 at ILLINOIS 39 -5.5 44.5 14-16 L L U 172 3.7 93 5.8 1 68 2.5 215 5.1 011/29/14 MICHIGAN ST 62 +13 43 10-34 L L O 38 1.7 195 4.3 2 118 2.9 180 6.9 1BOSTON COLLEGE 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 at MASSACHUSETTS 23 -17 48.5 30-7 W W U 338 5.5 173 6.9 1 55 2.5 147 6.7 19/5/14 PITTSBURGH 45 +5.5 50 20-30 L L U 142 4.2 134 4.8 2 302 6.0 111 5.6 19/13/14 USC 55 +17 57.5 37-31 W W O 452 8.4 54 3.9 1 20 0.7 317 7.7 09/20/14 MAINE 19 -22 46.5 40-10 W W O 413 6.5 136 6.5 1 16 0.7 123 6.8 09/27/14 COLORADO ST 44 -6.5 56 21-24 L L U 239 4.9 169 9.4 1 162 6.8 268 6.5 210/11/14 at NC STATE 43 +2 55 30-14 W W U 310 5.4 101 5.3 1 43 1.5 174 5.8 210/18/14 CLEMSON 53 +6 45.5 13-17 L W U 120 3.3 143 7.2 0 113 3.1 285 6.3 010/25/14 at WAKE FOREST 29 -13 41 23-17 W L U 202 4.6 165 11.0 1 19 0.6 242 8.1 111/1/14 at VIRGINIA TECH 43 +3 40 33-31 W W O 258 5.5 110 7.3 0 69 2.4 345 7.0 111/8/14 LOUISVILLE 52 +3 45.5 19-38 L L O 166 3.9 166 8.3 4 166 4.2 257 10.7 111/22/14 at FLORIDA ST 58 +16.5 58 17-20 L W U 240 4.7 73 6.6 0 110 3.8 281 8.8 111/29/14 SYRACUSE 37 -11 45.5 28-7 W W U 142 2.9 160 9.4 1 62 2.2 66 3.3 2



(233) PENN ST [SU:6-6 | ATS:5-6-1]

Head Coach: James Franklin • Conference: Big Ten

(234) BOSTON COLLEGE (-3 | 40) [SU:7-5 | ATS:8-4]Head Coach: Steve Addazio • Conference: ACC


Penn St 39 40

Boston College -3.5 -3


47

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


47


YANKEE STADIUM (NEW YORK, NY)

• BOSTON COLLEGE is 8-3 ATS(L2Y) - Against solid defensive teams allowing less than 22 PPG(CS)• PENN ST is 3-13-3 ATS(L5Y) - Against elite rushing teams averaging more than 5.0 yards per

carry(CS)• BOSTON COLLEGE is 11-1 UNDER(L5Y) - Against lesser rushing teams averaging less than 3.6

yards per carry(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?233 PENN ST 40 42 20.1 21.4 OVER 21.4 234 BOSTON COLLEGE -3 46 -3.5 24.4 23.6 23.0

RECENT PENN ST BOWL GAME LOG RECENT BOSTON COLLEGE BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/29/07 TEXAS A&M (Alamo) 24-17 W -5 W 52U 12/28/07 MICHIGAN ST (Champs Sports) 24-21 W -5 L 58.5U1/1/09 USC (Rose) 24-38 L 10 L 44.5O 12/31/08 VANDERBILT (Music City) 14-16 L -5 L 40U1/1/10 LSU (Capital One) 19-17 W 2 W 40U 12/26/09 USC (San Francisco) 13-24 L 7.5 L 45U1/1/11 FLORIDA (Outback) 24-37 L 7 L 47.5O 1/9/11 NEVADA (San Francisco) 13-20 L 7.5 W 54U1/2/12 HOUSTON (Heart Of Dallas) 14-30 L 6.5 L 56U 12/31/13 ARIZONA (Independence) 19-42 L 7 L 57.5O

RECENT PENN ST BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT BOSTON COLLEGE BOWL GAME TRENDS* PENN ST is 2-0 SU & ATS in December bowl games since '99 * BOSTON COLLEGE has lost four straight bowl games outright* FAVORITES are 4-1 SU & ATS in L5 PENN ST bowl games * Four of L5 BOSTON COLLEGE bowl games went UNDER the total* Nine of L12 PENN ST bowl games went UNDER the total * BC's only recent bowl game vs Big Ten foe was 24-21 win in '07

The Nittany Lions hold a huge 19-4 SU advantage here, but other than home-and-home meetings in 2003-04, the other games were played between 1949-1992. This time they’ll tee it up in Yankee Stadium. The Eagles have lost their last four bowl games SU, including last season under Steve Addazio. James Franklin makes his PSU bowl debut after going 2-1 SU at Vanderbilt.

The Pinstripe Bowl is happy to welcome Penn State for the first time in the five-year history of the contest, as the Nittany Lions had their postseason ban lifted earlier this year. They will take on Boston College, meaning two distinctly east regional teams will square off. That is important, because regional edge in this matchup has been key, with Syracuse and Rutgers, two New York schools, capturing all of the ATS wins to date. Neither team this year has an edge, as both schools are located about 3-1/2 hours from the Bronx. Therefore, we’ll have to look for something else to go on. The edge could come from the pointspread, where B.C. opened as just under a field goal favorite. Dogs are 3-0 ATS historically in this game, taking the last three. Not coincidentally, all of those three games went UNDER the total as well.

Paul says: Boston College is a power running team and the Penn State defense is very good at containing the run at just 85 yards per game allowed. However, Eagles quarterback Tyler Murphy is one elusive player and just when opponents think they have him corralled, he goes for a 30-yard jaunt. The Penn State offensive line was a wreck the entire season, which caused QB Christian Hackenberg to lose his confidence, being jittery in the pocket and his accuracy suffered. I’m not sure the Nittany Lions find the answers they need in a month since the Eagles have a quality defense in their own right. B.C. by 6.

RECENT PINSTRIPE BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/30/10 SYRACUSE (BEAST) 36 KANSAS ST (B12) 34 0 48.5 SYRACUSE (BEAST) SYRACUSE (BEAST) N/A N/A OVER12/30/11 IOWA ST (B12) 13 RUTGERS (BEAST) 27 -1.5 46 RUTGERS (BEAST) RUTGERS (BEAST) DOG DOG UNDER12/29/12 WEST VIRGINIA (B12) 14 SYRACUSE (BEAST) 38 -4 70 SYRACUSE (BEAST) SYRACUSE (BEAST) DOG DOG UNDER12/28/13 NOTRE DAME (IND) 29 RUTGERS (AAC) 16 -15 54 NOTRE DAME (IND) RUTGERS (AAC) FAV DOG UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Saturday, December 27, 2014 - (233) PENN ST vs. (234) BOSTON COLLEGE (-3)Boston College Penn St Boston College * Penn St Boston College Boston College Penn St Boston College

Saturday, December 27, 2014 - (233) PENN ST vs. (234) BOSTON COLLEGE - TOTAL (40)OVER OVER OVER UNDER OVER OVER OVER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


48




With Bo Pelini ousted, Barney Cotton takes over for this bowl outing and it will be intriguing to see if Nebraska players play hard for their former coach or show their disgust for his firing. Either way, the Ameer Abdullah should be at or near full strength which will help the Cornhuskers offense immensely since QB Tommy Armstrong is nothing more than an adequate thrower. The Nebraska defense will need a strong pass rush to contain USC’s fine passing game. Steve Sarkisian’s first year as the head coach was less placid than he or anyone associated with Trojans program had hoped at 8-4 (7-5 ATS). With QB Cody Kessler and a stable of receivers, the Trojans owned the No. 15 passing attack (294.6 YPG). The defense was an issue in conceding 400 YPG. With the recruiting restrictions off, a win paints a much brighter future as the Men of Troy start building depth.

HOLIDAY BOWL • 8:00 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 27, 2014

NEBRASKA (25) 37.4 22 45-248 [5.5] 26-13-198 [7.7] 11.9 24.8 19 38-176 [4.7] 33-16-196 [5.9] 15.0 -2 +12.6 USC (24) 35.1 24 41-158 [3.9] 35-25-295 [8.4] 12.9 23.8 23 34-132 [3.9] 41-24-268 [6.4] 16.8 +11 +11.3 NEBRASKA 35.2 18 40-168 [4.2] 29-14-213 [7.3] 10.8 31.2 20 42-227 [5.4] 35-17-185 [5.2] 13.2 0 +4.0 USC 26.2 18 34-117 [3.4] 32-22-252 [7.9] 14.1 25.3 24 39-160 [4.2] 41-26-277 [6.8] 17.3 +4 +0.9

NEBRASKA 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 FLA ATLANTIC 26 -20 50.5 55-7 W W O 498 8.7 286 8.2 0 105 3.5 95 3.2 09/6/14 MCNEESE ST 23 -35 65.5 31-24 W L U 195 5.9 242 7.8 1 178 4.0 160 6.2 19/13/14 at FRESNO ST 35 -11 60 55-19 W W O 280 6.7 282 11.8 1 105 3.8 241 4.1 09/20/14 MIAMI FL 47 -8 54 41-31 W W O 343 6.4 113 8.7 2 76 3.3 359 8.5 39/27/14 ILLINOIS 39 -21 58.5 45-14 W W O 458 6.5 166 7.9 2 78 3.3 261 6.9 310/4/14 at MICHIGAN ST 62 +6.5 52.5 22-27 L W U 47 1.3 282 6.3 4 188 4.3 234 8.1 310/18/14 at NORTHWESTERN 40 -7 54 38-17 W W O 234 5.3 237 7.9 0 117 3.4 173 4.4 110/25/14 RUTGERS 38 -19.5 60.5 42-24 W L O 292 7.1 163 7.4 2 143 3.8 205 7.9 111/1/14 PURDUE 33 -21.5 58 35-14 W L U 179 3.5 118 5.6 3 124 3.9 216 4.7 211/15/14 at WISCONSIN 56 +5 55 24-59 L L O 118 2.6 62 3.4 5 581 11.0 46 4.2 411/22/14 MINNESOTA 48 -8.5 52 24-28 L L U 174 4.6 223 11.2 2 281 5.3 135 7.5 011/28/14 at IOWA 47 +1 52.5 37-34 W W O 161 5.2 202 7.2 2 142 2.8 230 6.1 4USC 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 FRESNO ST 35 -18.5 58 52-13 W W O 277 4.3 424 10.3 2 157 4.8 160 4.4 49/6/14 at STANFORD 56 +3 52.5 13-10 W W U 156 4.2 135 6.1 0 128 3.4 285 9.5 29/13/14 at BOSTON COLLEGE 46 -17 57.5 31-37 L L O 20 0.7 317 7.7 0 452 8.4 54 3.9 19/27/14 OREGON ST 41 -7 56 35-10 W W U 200 4.2 261 7.9 0 58 2.8 123 3.5 210/4/14 ARIZONA ST 54 -11.5 67.5 34-38 L L O 220 4.4 273 6.1 0 31 1.4 510 11.1 010/11/14 at ARIZONA 53 +1 66.5 28-26 W W U 239 6.1 185 6.2 2 77 2.7 395 5.5 110/18/14 COLORADO 37 -19 58.5 56-28 W W O 213 6.5 319 11.4 1 172 3.7 231 4.7 210/25/14 at UTAH 46 +1.5 52 21-24 L L U 100 2.7 264 8.0 2 137 3.3 194 6.1 211/1/14 at WASHINGTON ST 40 -7 67.5 44-17 W W U 127 4.0 400 12.5 1 34 1.3 410 6.2 311/13/14 CALIFORNIA 41 -14 72 38-30 W L U 79 2.3 371 8.8 1 105 3.4 279 5.8 111/22/14 at UCLA 54 +3.5 62 20-38 L L U 62 1.9 214 6.3 2 135 3.1 326 10.5 211/29/14 NOTRE DAME 47 -5.5 62 49-14 W W O 205 3.9 372 9.3 0 104 4.2 245 6.3 2



(235) NEBRASKA [SU:9-3 | ATS:7-5]

Head Coach: Mike Riley • Conference: Big 10

(236) USC (-6.5 | 62) [SU:8-4 | ATS:7-5]Head Coach: Steve Sarkisian • Conference: Pac-12


Nebraska 62 62

USC -6 -6.5


49

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


49


QUALCOMM STADIUM (SAN DIEGO, CA)

• USC is 8-3 ATS(S2000) - In Bowl Games• NEBRASKA is 2-8 ATS(L2Y) - Against efficient defenses allowing more than 15.7 yards per

point(CS)• USC is 13-2 UNDER(L2Y) - Against decent offensive teams averaging more than 5.7 yards per

play(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?235 NEBRASKA 62 50 26.6 28.9 NEB 25.1 236 USC -6.5 55 -5.3 31.4 30.3 35.4

RECENT NEBRASKA BOWL GAME LOG RECENT USC BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/30/09 ARIZONA (Holiday) 33-0 W -2 W 42U 1/1/08 ILLINOIS (Rose) 49-17 W -13 W 48O12/30/10 WASHINGTON (Holiday) 7-19 L -12 L 55U 1/1/09 PENN ST (Rose) 38-24 W -10 W 44.5O1/2/12 SOUTH CAROLINA (Capital One) 13-30 L 3 L 45U 12/26/09 BOSTON COLLEGE (San Francisco) 24-13 W -7.5 W 45U1/1/13 GEORGIA (Capital One) 31-45 L 9.5 L 61.5O 12/31/12 GEORGIA TECH (Sun) 7-21 L -7 L 63.5U1/1/14 GEORGIA (Gator) 24-19 W 9.5 W 61U 12/21/13 FRESNO ST (Las Vegas) 45-20 W -4.5 W 65.5U

RECENT NEBRASKA BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT USC BOWL GAME TRENDS* NEBRASKA broke a 3-game bowl losing skid w/ win vs Georgia LY * USC is 5-1 SU & ATS in its L6 bowl games* Ten of L12 NEBRASKA bowl games went UNDER the total * USC is 6-0 SU & ATS vs. Big Ten in bowl games since '96* Since '93, FAVORITES are 15-5 SU & 14-6 ATS in NEB bowl games * FAVORITES are on a 4-1 SU & ATS run in USC bowl games

The Holiday Bowl does it again with another strong matchup. USC is 3-0-1 SU all-time vs. Nebraska, including winning decisively and covering both times in a 2006-07 home-and-home series. The Trojans are on a 9-2 SU run in bowls, and are an impressive 34-17 SU all-time. This will be the Cornhuskers’ third Holiday Bowl since 2009 (1-1 SU/ATS), and fourth overall.

There is a popular high-scoring misconception about the Holiday Bowl. In fact, although Texas Tech’s 37-23 win over Arizona State last year may seem high scoring on the surface, as did Baylor’s 49-26 win over UCLA in 2012, both games failed to meet lofty totals, and became the 5th & 6th straight in this series to go UNDER. Tech’s win was the third straight for the Big 12 over the Pac 12 and brought the 10-year mark of the Big 12 to 7-3 SU & ATS. This coming despite the Pac 12’s obvious regional advantage in San Diego. What is also noteworthy is that the Red Raiders were 17-point underdogs and pulled the outright upset. They became the eighth straight dog of more than 4-points to win ATS. Six of those eight teams pulled the upset. Nebraska will be looking to be the 9th in a row to carry on that trend.

VI Doug says: Both teams failed to do what they set out to do this season and for Nebraska, it cost Bo Pelini his job. There was a lot of angry talk at first coming out of Lincoln but with Barney Cotton the interim coach and Mike Riley in place to take over, the Cornhuskers will have their heads in the right place for this contest. USC lost four times and when facing more physical opposing teams, they did not always respond well and the Children of the Corn love to mix it up in the trenches. The Trojans have a terrific passing game but Nebraska is 6-0 ATS away vs. teams with a completion percentage of 58% or better.

RECENT HOLIDAY BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/30/09 NEBRASKA (B12) 33 ARIZONA (P12) 0 -2 42 NEBRASKA (B12) NEBRASKA (B12) FAV FAV UNDER12/30/10 NEBRASKA (B12) 7 WASHINGTON (P12) 19 -12 55 WASHINGTON (P12) WASHINGTON (P12) DOG DOG UNDER12/28/11 TEXAS (B12) 21 CALIFORNIA (P12) 10 -3 48 TEXAS (B12) TEXAS (B12) FAV FAV UNDER12/27/12 UCLA (P12) 26 BAYLOR (B12) 49 -3 81 BAYLOR (B12) BAYLOR (B12) DOG DOG UNDER12/30/13 ARIZONA ST (P12) 23 TEXAS TECH (B12) 37 -17 72 TEXAS TECH (B12) TEXAS TECH (B12) DOG DOG UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Saturday, December 27, 2014 - (235) NEBRASKA vs. (236) USC (-6.5)Nebraska Nebraska Nebraska* Nebraska Nebraska Nebraska USC Nebraska

Saturday, December 27, 2014 - (235) NEBRASKA vs. (236) USC - TOTAL (62)OVER OVER* OVER* UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


50




A pair of 7-5 teams who realistically were not ready to compete for their conference honors and who have coaches who understand the value of heading into the off-season with brighter days ahead if they win this bowl. We began to see where coach Dana Holgorsen wants to take West Virginia with a robust offense. Clint Trickett and Kevin White will have one last hurrah together and if the defense can make more strides, the Mountaineers are truly making progress. The 5-0 start by Texas A&M was mirage, with opponents not as good as advertised and the Aggies able to disguise their weaknesses. Eventually Kevin Sumlin’s squad was uncovered and this bowl becomes a table-setter for the young players who saw the field and a strong recruiting class coming in. There is every reason to think this will be a wide open shootout with number of big plays of 50+ yards.

LIBERTY BOWL • 2:00 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 29, 2014

WEST VIRGINIA 33.2 26 44-187 [4.2] 41-27-315 [7.7] 15.1 26.2 19 38-163 [4.3] 35-18-226 [6.5] 14.8 -15 +7.0 TEXAS A&M 34.4 23 31-143 [4.6] 40-26-306 [7.7] 13.1 27.3 23 44-224 [5.1] 32-18-225 [7.0] 16.4 -7 +7.1 WEST VIRGINIA 31.2 26 43-192 [4.5] 43-29-325 [7.6] 16.6 28.5 22 39-204 [5.3] 39-22-254 [6.4] 16.1 -1 +2.7 TEXAS A&M 36.2 24 31-157 [5.0] 43-27-346 [8.0] 13.9 34.5 24 44-234 [5.3] 30-17-249 [8.4] 14.0 0 +1.7

WEST VIRGINIA 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 vs. ALABAMA 68 +22 53 23-33 L W O 28 1.2 365 8.1 0 288 5.9 250 7.6 19/6/14 TOWSON 14 -25 66 54-0 W W U 251 4.8 355 8.1 1 42 1.4 80 3.3 09/13/14 at MARYLAND 42 +3.5 61 40-37 W W O 183 3.1 511 10.4 4 163 6.0 284 7.5 19/20/14 OKLAHOMA 56 +8 66 33-45 L L O 137 3.4 376 9.2 3 301 6.5 209 7.0 110/4/14 KANSAS 34 -27 58.5 33-14 W L U 255 6.1 302 8.2 3 65 1.9 111 4.0 010/11/14 at TEXAS TECH 42 -6 76.5 37-34 W L U 249 5.0 301 6.8 1 217 5.7 348 7.6 110/18/14 BAYLOR 63 +8 80 41-27 W W U 134 2.7 322 9.2 3 95 2.3 223 6.0 010/25/14 at OKLAHOMA ST 45 -3 66.5 34-10 W W U 210 4.8 238 7.9 0 194 5.0 242 5.9 211/1/14 TCU 66 +3 69 30-31 L W U 195 3.6 162 6.2 5 223 5.3 166 5.5 211/8/14 at TEXAS 49 -3 51 16-33 L L U 200 4.9 248 5.1 2 227 5.8 124 4.3 111/20/14 KANSAS ST 57 -2.5 58.5 20-26 L L U 123 3.3 310 6.5 4 1 0.0 400 11.8 211/29/14 at IOWA ST 32 -10 62 37-24 W W U 285 7.5 285 7.0 2 135 3.4 275 5.5 2TEXAS A&M 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/28/14 at SOUTH CAROLINA 50 +9 60.5 52-28 W W O 169 4.3 511 8.5 0 67 3.0 366 9.2 19/6/14 LAMAR 20 -46.5 77 73-3 W W U 225 6.3 405 9.6 3 90 2.4 153 3.6 29/13/14 RICE 33 -30.5 69 38-10 W L U 168 6.5 309 9.4 1 240 4.4 241 6.7 09/20/14 at SMU 18 -33.5 60 58-6 W W O 268 8.6 395 10.7 1 102 2.4 139 4.8 09/27/14 vs. ARKANSAS 57 -8.5 73 35-28 W L U 137 5.1 386 9.4 1 285 6.1 199 7.4 110/4/14 at MISSISSIPPI ST 59 +2.5 71 31-48 L L O 161 5.2 365 5.9 3 289 5.7 270 10.4 210/11/14 OLE MISS 58 -2.5 64 20-35 L L U 54 1.5 401 7.6 3 160 4.6 178 9.4 010/18/14 at ALABAMA 68 +11.5 63 0-59 L L U 31 1.3 141 4.5 1 298 6.6 304 8.7 011/1/14 LA MONROE 29 -32 61 21-16 W L U 137 3.3 106 3.8 2 78 2.6 269 5.5 111/8/14 at AUBURN 60 +23.5 68.5 41-38 W W O 176 5.0 277 9.6 1 363 6.2 219 10.4 311/15/14 MISSOURI 52 -3.5 55 27-34 L L O 104 3.9 237 6.6 1 335 6.8 252 6.3 111/27/14 LSU 56 +3 53 17-23 L L U 84 4.0 144 5.3 2 384 6.7 107 5.1 1



(237) WEST VIRGINIA (-3 | 67) [SU:7-5 | ATS:7-5]

Head Coach: Dana Holgorsen • Conference: Big 12

(238) TEXAS A&M [SU:7-5 | ATS:4-8]Head Coach: Kevin Sumlin • Conference: SEC


West Virginia -3.5 -3

Texas A&M 63 67


51

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


51


LIBERTY BOWL (MEMPHIS, TN)

• WEST VIRGINIA is 7-4 ATS(L2Y) - Against efficient offenses averaging less than 13.2 yards per point(CS)

• TEXAS A&M is 2-8 ATS(L5Y) - AS underdog of 7 or less points• WEST VIRGINIA is 8-2 UNDER(L2Y) - Against decent passing teams averaging more than 7.5

yards per attempt(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?237 WEST VIRGINIA -3 52 29.8 UNDER 36.2 32.8 238 TEXAS A&M 67 50 1.3 29.7 35.1 36.6 A&M

RECENT WEST VIRGINIA BOWL GAME LOG RECENT TEXAS A&M BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/27/08 NORTH CAROLINA (Belk) 31-30 W -2.5 L 47.5O 12/28/09 GEORGIA (Independence) 20-44 L 6 L 65.5U1/1/10 FLORIDA ST (Gator) 21-33 L -3 L 56U 1/7/11 LSU (Cotton) 24-41 L 1.5 L 48.5O12/28/10 NC STATE (Champs Sports) 7-23 L -3 L 49.5U 12/31/11 NORTHWESTERN (Texas) 33-22 W -9.5 W 68.5U1/4/12 CLEMSON (Orange) 70-33 W 3 W 64.5O 1/4/13 OKLAHOMA (Cotton) 41-13 W -3 W 72.5U12/29/12 SYRACUSE (Pinstripe) 14-38 L -4 L 70U 12/31/13 DUKE (Chick-Fil-A Peach) 52-48 W -14 L 75.5O

RECENT WEST VIRGINIA BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT TEXAS A&M BOWL GAME TRENDS* UNDERDOGS are 6-2 SU & 8-0 ATS in L8 WEST VIRGINIA bowl games * FAVORITES are 7-0 SU & 6-1 ATS in L7 TEXAS A&M bowl games* WVU is 2-0 SU & ATS in bowl games vs SEC foes since 2000 * Nine of L13 TEXAS A&M bowl games went UNDER the total* MOUNTAINEERS are 2-5 SU & 0-7 ATS as bowl game chalk since '95 * AGGIES are 0-5 SU & ATS L5 as bowl game dogs, losing by 21.4 PPG

These two 7-5 teams meet for the first time in the Liberty Bowl. Kevin Sumlin is 2-0 SU in bowls at A&M, and 3-1 SU overall. Dana Holgorsen and the Mountaineers return to a bowl after a one-year absence. They put 70 points on Clemson in a romp in the 2011-12 Orange Bowl, but lost 38-14 to Syracuse in the 2012 Pinstripe Bowl.

In six of the L7 years, the Autozone Liberty Bowl has been a chance for Conference USA to take down the big boys. For 2014 however, there are big boys on each sideline, as West Virginia of the Big 12 takes on Texas A&M of the SEC. These are two schools relatively new to their conference affiliations, and also new to this bowl series. West Virginia is the favorite and looking to extend the SU & ATS winning streak of the chalk to three games. A&M is hoping to turn around a recent stretch of 1-3 ATS in this game for the SEC. This year’s posted total will represent the highest in the series since 2004, when Louisville and Boise State put up 84 points on a closing total of 77.

Steve Makinen says: Remember back at the end of September when Texas A&M was thought of as one of the best teams in the country and QB Kenny Hill was on the short list of potential candidates for the Heisman Trophy? Well, that is a long time ago, and Kyle Allen is the new quarterback for the Aggies after Hill’s midseason suspension, but I think that HC Kevin Sumlin is just as capable now of drawing up a big attack for West Virginia as he did to open the season. The more preparation time Sumlin gets, the better his offenses seem to perform. They shouldn’t meet a whole lot of resistance from West Virginai either, as the Mountaineers allowed 30+ points on six different occasions this season. I certainly don’t like teams like that as favorites. I also don’t like the Big 12’s history of being unable to compete with SEC team in bowl games. Take the dogs.

RECENT LIBERTY BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U1/2/10 ARKANSAS (SEC) 20 EAST CAROLINA (CUSA) 17 -7.5 60 ARKANSAS (SEC) EAST CAROLINA (CUSA) FAV DOG UNDER12/31/10 GEORGIA (SEC) 6 UCF (CUSA) 10 -7 53.5 UCF (CUSA) UCF (CUSA) DOG DOG UNDER12/31/11 VANDERBILT (SEC) 24 CINCINNATI (BEAST) 31 -2 50.5 CINCINNATI (BEAST) CINCINNATI (BEAST) DOG DOG OVER12/31/12 TULSA (CUSA) 31 IOWA ST (B12) 17 -2 50.5 TULSA (CUSA) TULSA (CUSA) FAV FAV UNDER12/31/13 MISSISSIPPI ST (SEC) 44 RICE (CUSA) 7 -7 50.5 MISSISSIPPI ST (SEC) MISSISSIPPI ST (SEC) FAV FAV OVER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Monday, December 29, 2014 - (237) WEST VIRGINIA vs. (238) TEXAS A&M (+3)Texas A&M Texas A&M West Virginia Texas A&M* Texas A&M Texas A&M Texas A&M Texas A&M

Monday, December 29, 2014 - (237) WEST VIRGINIA vs. (238) TEXAS A&M - TOTAL (67)OVER UNDER OVER OVER OVER UNDER OVER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


52




No two ways about, 2014 was a vastly disappointing year for Oklahoma football. The Sooners lost two close ones to TCU and Kansas State, were battered by Baylor and thoroughly embarrassed at home in OT setback to Oklahoma State. Bob Stoops troops enter this contest with more questions than answers as the defense failed against better offenses all year. The health of QB Travis Knight and RB Samaje Perine will impact this matchup, but one cannot help but wonder what the Sooners have to play for. Clemson had the No.1 total defense (259.6 YPG) and No.7 scoring defense in the country (17.6). When freshman QB Deshaun Watson was on the field, Clemson could play with anyone. Unfortunately he was banged up a few times and the Tigers offense stalled without him. With a stocked veteran defense Clemson will try close out the careers of their seniors in fine fashion.

RUSSELL ATHLETIC BOWL • 5:30 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 29, 2014

CLEMSON (18) 30.1 20 41-154 [3.7] 34-22-256 [7.5] 13.6 17.6 14 35-98 [2.8] 29-15-162 [5.5] 14.8 +1 +12.5 OKLAHOMA 38.9 23 44-269 [6.1] 29-16-212 [7.3] 12.4 24.8 20 35-110 [3.2] 39-22-273 [6.9] 15.4 0 +14.1 CLEMSON 19.0 17 38-117 [3.1] 35-21-225 [6.5] 18.0 25.8 16 38-144 [3.8] 25-14-159 [6.3] 11.7 -2 -6.8 OKLAHOMA 43.7 24 43-285 [6.6] 31-17-223 [7.2] 11.6 24.5 23 35-118 [3.4] 45-24-317 [7.1] 17.8 +3 +19.2

CLEMSON 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 at GEORGIA 61 +9.5 56 21-45 L L O 102 2.3 189 5.9 1 328 8.0 131 5.0 19/6/14 S CAROLINA ST 20 -34 58 73-7 W W O 268 5.3 467 11.1 1 7 0.3 37 1.5 19/20/14 at FLORIDA ST 58 +10 54 17-23 L W U 101 2.5 306 9.3 1 13 0.5 305 7.8 29/27/14 NORTH CAROLINA 43 -14 63.5 50-35 W W O 92 2.1 436 11.2 1 84 2.8 394 8.0 110/4/14 NC STATE 43 -14 64 41-0 W W U 226 4.5 267 8.9 0 121 3.2 35 1.8 310/11/14 LOUISVILLE 52 -9 46.5 23-17 W L U 72 2.3 157 4.0 2 52 1.4 212 7.1 210/18/14 at BOSTON COLLEGE 46 -6 45.5 17-13 W L U 113 3.1 285 6.3 0 120 3.3 143 7.2 010/25/14 SYRACUSE 37 -17 47 16-6 W L U 166 3.5 209 6.0 4 88 2.6 82 2.9 311/6/14 at WAKE FOREST 29 -21 42 34-20 W L O 145 3.9 282 6.7 2 7 0.2 112 3.7 011/15/14 at GEORGIA TECH 56 -2 56.5 6-28 L L U 125 3.9 65 3.0 3 251 5.0 102 9.3 211/22/14 GEORGIA ST 13 -39 57.5 28-0 W L U 209 4.9 148 4.5 2 40 1.2 115 3.5 311/29/14 SOUTH CAROLINA 50 -4.5 53 35-17 W W U 225 5.6 266 12.7 1 63 1.9 276 6.7 1OKLAHOMA 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 LOUISIANA TECH 45 -34.5 56.5 48-16 W L O 183 4.6 253 7.4 2 54 1.9 191 5.3 19/6/14 at TULSA 27 -24 56 52-7 W W O 261 8.4 319 8.4 0 94 2.8 234 4.7 49/13/14 TENNESSEE 49 -21 58 34-10 W W U 146 4.3 308 9.3 2 112 3.4 201 4.6 39/20/14 at WEST VIRGINIA 52 -8 66 45-33 W W O 301 6.5 209 7.0 1 137 3.4 376 9.2 310/4/14 at TCU 66 -3.5 56.5 33-37 L L O 152 3.6 309 8.6 2 151 3.9 318 8.2 310/11/14 vs. TEXAS 49 -16.5 44.5 31-26 W L O 103 3.4 129 6.5 0 148 3.7 334 7.6 110/18/14 KANSAS ST 57 -7 54 30-31 L L O 198 4.7 335 9.3 2 160 5.0 225 9.8 011/1/14 at IOWA ST 32 -15.5 61 59-14 W W O 510 8.6 241 5.6 3 87 2.8 247 5.5 111/8/14 BAYLOR 63 -5 67 14-48 L L U 171 5.2 148 5.1 1 148 2.8 396 9.2 011/15/14 at TEXAS TECH 42 -13.5 65 42-30 W L O 384 7.5 133 6.7 3 93 3.9 393 7.9 011/22/14 KANSAS 34 -26 55 44-7 W W U 510 9.3 39 3.0 2 19 0.5 84 3.7 212/6/14 OKLAHOMA ST 45 -21 58.5 35-38 L L O 304 4.8 120 7.1 1 112 4.3 273 7.8 1



(239) CLEMSON [SU:9-3 | ATS:5-7]

Head Coach: Dabo Swinney • Conference: ACC

(240) OKLAHOMA (-3 | 53.5) [SU:8-4 | ATS:5-7]Head Coach: Bob Stoops • Conference: Big 12


Clemson 53.5 53.5

Oklahoma -3 -3


53

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


53


CITRUS BOWL (ORLANDO, FL)

• CLEMSON is 13-4 ATS(L3Y) - Against efficient offenses averaging less than 13.2 yards per point(CS)

• OKLAHOMA is 3-7 ATS(L3Y) - Against solid rushing defenses yielding less than 3.35 yards per carry(CS)

• OKLAHOMA is 10-1 OVER(L3Y) - Against decent passing defenses yielding less than 6.5 yards per attempt(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?239 CLEMSON 53.5 53 23.6 25.5 22.9 240 OKLAHOMA -3 56 -2.8 29.6 29.6 31.7 OKL

RECENT CLEMSON BOWL GAME LOG RECENT OKLAHOMA BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/27/09 KENTUCKY (Music City) 21-13 W -6.5 W 52.5U 12/31/09 STANFORD (Sun) 31-27 W -11 L 54.5O12/31/10 SOUTH FLORIDA (Belk) 26-31 L -5 L 40.5O 1/1/11 CONNECTICUT (Fiesta) 48-20 W -16 W 53.5O1/4/12 WEST VIRGINIA (Orange) 33-70 L -3 L 64.5O 12/30/11 IOWA (Insight) 31-14 W -14 W 58U12/31/12 LSU (Chick-Fil-A Peach) 25-24 W 5.5 W 58U 1/4/13 TEXAS A&M (Cotton) 13-41 L 3 L 72.5U1/3/14 OHIO ST (Orange) 40-35 W 2.5 W 71.5O 1/2/14 ALABAMA (Sugar) 45-31 W 16.5 W 51.5O

RECENT CLEMSON BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT OKLAHOMA BOWL GAME TRENDS* CLEMSON is 2-0 SU & ATS in L2 bowl games after going 1-6 ATS prior * OU is 4-1 SU & 3-2 ATS in bowl games after going 1-7 in prior 8* UNDERDOGS are 7-2 SU & 8-1 ATS in L9 CLEMSON bowl games * FAVORITES are 5-1 SU & 4-2 ATS in L6 OKLAHOMA bowl games* CLEMSON is 0-3 ATS in L3 bowl games vs Big 12 foes * OVER the total is 7-4 in SOONERS' L11 bowl games

These teams last met in the 1989 Citrus Bowl, when the Tigers won a 13-7 defensive struggle. The Sooners decisively won regular-season matchups in 1972 and 1963. A victory will give Dabo Swinney his third consecutive SU bowl triumph and a fourth consecutive double-figures win season. Bob Stoops will be making his 16th consecutive bowl trip, and is on a 4-1 SU run.

The Russell Athletic Bowl is a relatively new name for a bowl series that has had several different corporate sponsors over the years. In 2001, the game moved from Miami to Orlando, where it still resides. Regardless of the name, several key trends have developed in this game. First off, Louisville’s 36-9 win over Miami last year marked the eighth game in nine years to go UNDER the total. Losing teams have scored just 11.7 PPG in that span. Designated home teams, in this case Oklahoma, have gone 9-3 SU & 11-1 ATS since 2002. Finally, ACC teams are 9-2 SU (7-4 ATS) in this bowl series since ’03, with both losses by Miami, meaning all other ACC reps are 9-0 SU & 7-2 ATS. Clemson was here in 2002 & 2005, splitting the two games SU & ATS.

Jason says: Just prior to when our best bets had to be in for the bowl season, it was announced that QB Trevor Knight was cleared to play for Oklahoma. On the other sideline, the news wasn’t so good…DeShawn Watson would not play for the Tigers. Now obviously this is big news and will be reflected in the pointspread, but to me, it is clearly more important for the Sooners, as their offense was horribly imbalanced with Cody Thomas under center. With Clemson boasting a stout run defense, the ability to throw the ball will be paramount. I also give the Sooners a big coaching edge in this game, as Bob Stoops’ teams typically REALLY show up to play in bowl games. Give me Oklahoma in this one.

RECENT RUSSELL ATHLETIC BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/29/09 MIAMI FL (ACC) 14 WISCONSIN (B10) 20 -3.5 55.5 WISCONSIN (B10) WISCONSIN (B10) DOG DOG UNDER12/28/10 WEST VIRGINIA (BEAST) 7 NC STATE (ACC) 23 -3 49.5 NC STATE (ACC) NC STATE (ACC) DOG DOG UNDER12/29/11 FLORIDA ST (ACC) 18 NOTRE DAME (IND) 14 -3 47.5 FLORIDA ST (ACC) FLORIDA ST (ACC) FAV FAV UNDER12/28/12 RUTGERS (BEAST) 10 VIRGINIA TECH (ACC) 13 -1 42 VIRGINIA TECH (ACC) VIRGINIA TECH (ACC) DOG DOG UNDER12/28/13 LOUISVILLE (AAC) 36 MIAMI FL (ACC) 9 -5.5 60 LOUISVILLE (AAC) LOUISVILLE (AAC) FAV FAV UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Monday, December 29, 2014 - (239) CLEMSON vs. (240) OKLAHOMA (-3)Clemson Oklahoma* Clemson Oklahoma Clemson Oklahoma Oklahoma Oklahoma

Monday, December 29, 2014 - (239) CLEMSON vs. (240) OKLAHOMA - TOTAL (53.5)OVER* OVER UNDER* UNDER UNDER UNDER OVER UNDER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


54




Fun matchup from the old Southwest Conference days. Arkansas might only be a .500 club but the fact they were 9-3 ATS and outscored opposing teams by 11.8 PPG are more telling numbers of how good this team actually is. The Razorbacks are now molded in what coach Bret Bielema prefers, a powerful ground attack (26th nationally), with an adequate passing offense. One little known fact about the Hogs this season, they finished 24th in total defense. First-year coach Charlie Strong made a strong statement in dismissing a number of players from the Texas program, signifying he wants character and talent. Sitting at 3-5, the Longhorns won three in a row in November and gave an indication of where the program is headed. QB Tyrone Swoopes will face competition this bowl game and will have to perform. This is compelling game with two squads seeking off-season momentum.

TEXAS BOWL • 9:00 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 29, 2014

TEXAS 22.6 19 38-149 [3.9] 33-19-212 [6.5] 16.0 23.2 19 41-162 [3.9] 33-20-186 [5.7] 15.0 -1 -0.6 ARKANSAS 32.0 22 42-220 [5.2] 28-16-190 [6.8] 12.8 20.2 18 34-124 [3.6] 31-17-221 [7.2] 17.1 +5 +11.8 TEXAS 21.3 19 38-140 [3.7] 32-20-231 [7.1] 17.4 15.7 17 38-138 [3.7] 32-19-184 [5.8] 20.5 +4 +5.6 ARKANSAS 24.4 23 42-239 [5.6] 29-15-161 [5.6] 16.4 29.2 23 35-165 [4.8] 35-21-305 [8.6] 16.1 +3 -4.8

TEXAS 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 NORTH TEXAS 24 -20.5 47.5 38-7 W W U 163 4.1 190 5.6 2 79 1.8 15 0.9 49/6/14 BYU 44 -1 47.5 7-41 L L O 82 2.3 176 5.7 4 248 4.2 181 6.7 29/13/14 vs. UCLA 54 +8 49.5 17-20 L W U 126 4.2 196 5.8 0 217 4.6 226 6.6 19/27/14 at KANSAS 34 -10 42 23-0 W W U 111 3.1 218 6.4 1 173 3.4 140 4.5 410/4/14 BAYLOR 63 +13.5 57 7-28 L L U 190 4.8 144 4.2 3 278 4.6 111 5.0 010/11/14 vs. OKLAHOMA 56 +16.5 44.5 26-31 L W O 148 3.7 334 7.6 1 103 3.4 129 6.5 010/18/14 IOWA ST 32 -10.5 46.5 48-45 W L O 191 4.9 321 8.9 2 179 4.7 345 6.3 310/25/14 at KANSAS ST 57 +9.5 47 0-23 L L U 90 3.3 106 4.2 1 143 3.3 224 7.5 011/1/14 at TEXAS TECH 42 -4 57 34-13 W W U 241 4.7 228 9.1 2 156 4.9 225 4.8 211/8/14 WEST VIRGINIA 52 +3 51 33-16 W W U 227 5.8 124 4.3 1 200 4.9 248 5.1 211/15/14 at OKLAHOMA ST 45 -1.5 47 28-7 W W U 125 2.9 305 9.2 0 34 1.5 158 5.4 211/27/14 TCU 66 +5 54 10-48 L L O 90 2.5 200 5.9 6 135 4.4 233 6.9 2ARKANSAS 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 at AUBURN 60 +17.5 56.5 21-45 L L O 153 5.3 175 5.6 1 302 6.3 293 13.3 19/6/14 NICHOLLS ST -9 -41.5 64 73-7 W W O 495 12.4 189 13.5 1 34 1.2 208 4.8 19/13/14 at TEXAS TECH 42 0 65.5 49-28 W W O 438 6.4 61 5.1 2 101 4.6 252 5.6 39/20/14 N ILLINOIS 40 -13.5 64.5 52-14 W W O 212 4.7 215 9.3 0 123 3.8 180 5.8 19/27/14 vs. TEXAS A&M 50 +8.5 73 28-35 L W U 285 6.1 199 7.4 1 137 5.1 386 9.4 110/11/14 ALABAMA 68 +8.5 53.5 13-14 L W U 89 2.3 246 6.2 3 66 2.1 161 7.7 210/18/14 GEORGIA 61 +3 54 32-45 L L O 126 3.4 296 6.6 4 207 5.3 179 10.5 010/25/14 UAB 33 -24 60.5 45-17 W W O 273 5.9 211 8.1 1 133 3.2 62 3.4 111/1/14 at MISSISSIPPI ST 59 +10 56 10-17 L W U 163 4.3 238 5.4 1 128 3.7 331 12.3 311/15/14 LSU 56 -2 45 17-0 W W U 95 2.5 169 6.3 0 36 1.1 87 4.0 111/22/14 OLE MISS 58 +3 44.5 30-0 W W U 159 3.2 152 8.9 1 63 1.9 253 6.7 611/28/14 at MISSOURI 52 -2 43 14-21 L L U 155 5.2 133 4.4 2 158 3.9 265 6.3 2



(241) TEXAS [SU:6-6 | ATS:7-5]

Head Coach: Charlie Strong • Conference: Big 12

(242) ARKANSAS (-6.5 | 45.5) [SU:6-6 | ATS:9-3]Head Coach: Bret Bielema • Conference: SEC


Texas 45.5 45.5

Arkansas -6 -6.5


55

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


55


NRG STADIUM (HOUSTON, TX)

• ARKANSAS is 8-2 ATS(CS) - On non-grass field• TEXAS is 3-7 ATS(L2Y) - Against efficient defenses allowing more than 15.7 yards per point(CS)• ARKANSAS is 9-0 UNDER(S2000) - In Bowl Games

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?241 TEXAS 45.5 49 16.7 24.5 TEX 21.0 242 ARKANSAS -6.5 57 -7.5 29.2 ARK 25.6 OVER 23.6

RECENT TEXAS BOWL GAME LOG RECENT ARKANSAS BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

1/5/09 OHIO ST (Fiesta) 24-21 W -9 L 51.5U 1/1/07 WISCONSIN (Capital One) 14-17 L -2 L 45.5U1/7/10 ALABAMA (Bcs Championship Game) 21-37 L 3.5 L 44.5O 1/1/08 MISSOURI (Cotton) 7-38 L 4 L 68.5U12/28/11 CALIFORNIA (Holiday) 21-10 W -3 W 48U 1/2/10 EAST CAROLINA (Liberty) 20-17 W -7.5 L 60U12/29/12 OREGON ST (Alamo) 31-27 W 3 W 56O 1/4/11 OHIO ST (Sugar) 26-31 L 3 L 57.5U12/30/13 OREGON (Alamo) 7-30 L 15.5 L 68U 1/6/12 KANSAS ST (Cotton) 29-16 W -9 W 65U

RECENT TEXAS BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT ARKANSAS BOWL GAME TRENDS* FAVORITES are 5-1 SU & 4-2 ATS in L6 TEXAS bowl games * The L8 ARKANSAS bowl games went UNDER the total* TEXAS is 9-3 SU but just 5-7 ATS in L12 bowl games * ARKANSAS is just 4-8 SU & ATS in L12 bowl games* TEXAS is on 3-1 OVER the total run as bowl game underdog * RAZORBACKS are 4-1 ATS in L5 bowl games vs Big 12 foes

These longtime Southwest Conference rivals will renew acquaintances in Houston’s Texas Bowl. The Longhorns rolled 52-10 as 27-point home favorites in the last matchup (2008). The Razorbacks sprung a 38-28 upset as 14-point road dogs in 2003. UT’s Charlie Strong was 3-2 SU in bowl games at Louisville, including last year’s blowout of Miami, Fla., in the Russell Athletic Bowl.

The Texas Bowl took the place of the formerly known Houston Bowl back in 2006, and is played at the Texans’ Stadium. This year’s game features an old southwest rivalry, as Texas takes on Arkansas. It will be the first ever meeting between a Big 12 team and SEC team in the game. The Longhorns will be looking to turn it around for the Big 12, as that league is just 2-4 SU & 1-5 ATS in the L6 tries despite holding an obvious regional advantage in almost all cases. In two attempts as an underdog, the Big 12 team has lost SU & ATS both times and has been outscored 75-24. This bowl series also has seen a distinctive totals trend grow in recent years as UNDER the total has converted in six of the L7 years, including a year ago when Syracuse beat Minnesota 21-17.

Paul says: Despite Arkansas being only a .500 team, this outfit was way more dominant than their record indicates. The Razorbacks outscored opposing teams by over 11 points a contest and were 9-3 ATS, proving they were better than market indications. Also, their defense was unheralded, being 26th in total defense, which my guess not many realized. While Texas make significant strides under Charley Strong, they still have a ways to go and my impression is these two former conference partners are moving forward, but because it is Year 1 for Strong and Year 2 for Bret Bielema and the Hogs are further along on both sides of the ball and win by 11.

RECENT TEXAS BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/31/09 MISSOURI (B12) 13 NAVY (IND) 35 -6.5 54.5 NAVY (IND) NAVY (IND) DOG DOG UNDER12/29/10 ILLINOIS (B10) 38 BAYLOR (B12) 14 -2 64.5 ILLINOIS (B10) ILLINOIS (B10) FAV FAV UNDER12/31/11 TEXAS A&M (B12) 33 NORTHWESTERN (B10) 22 -9.5 68.5 TEXAS A&M (B12) TEXAS A&M (B12) FAV FAV UNDER12/28/12 TEXAS TECH (B12) 34 MINNESOTA (B10) 31 -13 55.5 TEXAS TECH (B12) MINNESOTA (B10) FAV DOG OVER12/27/13 MINNESOTA (B10) 17 SYRACUSE (ACC) 21 -3.5 48 SYRACUSE (ACC) SYRACUSE (ACC) DOG DOG UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Monday, December 29, 2014 - (241) TEXAS vs. (242) ARKANSAS (-6.5)Texas* Texas Arkansas* Arkansas Arkansas Arkansas Texas Arkansas

Monday, December 29, 2014 - (241) TEXAS vs. (242) ARKANSAS - TOTAL (45.5)OVER OVER UNDER OVER OVER OVER UNDER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


56




After a 6-0 start, Notre Dame was definite Final Four material and they even earned a lot of respect in close loss to then No. 1 Florida State. Then the defensive injuries began to mount and all the Everett Golson mistakes could not be masked and Irish had no fight to close 0-4 SU and 0-5 ATS. The Notre Dame defense was run over for 244.2 YPG on the ground in their last five tests and how they will combat LSU’s potent rushing attack is a mystery at this juncture. The Tigers young squad played that way this season with exceptional and uneven performances all year. In the end, Les Miles club being 8-4 SU and ATS was accurate and they not only have the ground game to pound Notre Dame with but the defense also. This is meaningful contest for two young football teams heading into the off-season.

MUSIC CITY BOWL • 3:00 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 30, 2014

NOTRE DAME 33.0 24 36-151 [4.2] 36-22-294 [8.1] 13.5 29.2 22 41-161 [4.0] 33-20-240 [7.2] 13.7 -4 +3.8 LSU (22) 27.6 20 49-219 [4.5] 22-11-164 [7.5] 13.9 16.4 15 34-143 [4.2] 30-15-162 [5.4] 18.6 +4 +11.2 NOTRE DAME 30.3 25 36-137 [3.8] 39-24-323 [8.2] 15.2 33.8 22 40-162 [4.0] 32-21-252 [7.8] 12.2 -9 -3.5 LSU 17.6 18 44-176 [4.0] 22-10-137 [6.2] 17.8 25.2 16 36-174 [4.8] 26-14-163 [6.4] 13.4 +5 -7.6

NOTRE DAME 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 RICE 33 -19.5 53 48-17 W W O 281 6.7 295 13.4 0 141 3.5 226 8.7 29/6/14 MICHIGAN 42 -4 56 31-0 W W U 54 1.7 226 6.6 0 100 2.9 189 5.9 49/13/14 vs. PURDUE 33 -30 60.5 30-14 W L U 139 3.7 259 6.5 1 56 2.2 234 5.9 39/27/14 vs. SYRACUSE 37 -7.5 52.5 31-15 W W U 161 3.9 362 9.3 5 135 4.5 294 7.7 110/4/14 STANFORD 56 +3 46.5 17-14 W W U 129 4.0 241 5.6 2 47 1.5 158 4.4 210/11/14 NORTH CAROLINA 43 -16.5 61.5 50-43 W L O 219 5.1 300 7.9 3 184 4.4 326 7.8 210/18/14 at FLORIDA ST 58 +9.5 59 27-31 L W U 157 4.5 313 6.0 2 50 1.9 273 8.8 111/1/14 vs. NAVY 40 -14 54 49-39 W L O 218 5.6 315 12.6 1 336 5.6 118 6.9 111/8/14 at ARIZONA ST 54 +3 61 31-55 L L O 41 1.1 446 10.9 5 188 4.2 224 8.0 111/15/14 NORTHWESTERN 40 -17 54 40-43 L L O 211 5.3 287 7.2 4 263 5.5 284 5.9 411/22/14 LOUISVILLE 52 -2.5 51 28-31 L L O 99 3.4 236 9.8 1 229 4.6 180 8.6 111/29/14 at USC 55 +5.5 62 14-49 L L O 104 4.2 245 6.3 2 205 3.9 372 9.3 0LSU 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 vs. WISCONSIN 56 -3.5 49 28-24 W W O 126 2.7 239 11.4 1 268 6.9 50 2.1 29/6/14 SAM HOUSTON ST 34 -31 66 56-0 W W U 334 5.8 250 13.9 1 50 1.4 156 5.6 39/13/14 LA MONROE 29 -30 49.5 31-0 W W U 219 4.2 153 7.7 1 16 0.9 77 2.6 19/20/14 MISSISSIPPI ST 59 -7 48 29-34 L L O 89 2.5 341 9.5 1 302 6.2 268 11.2 29/27/14 NEW MEXICO ST 13 -44 57.5 63-7 W W O 363 6.7 200 10.0 4 172 4.6 102 3.1 410/4/14 at AUBURN 60 +7 55 7-41 L L U 138 3.8 142 5.9 0 298 6.1 268 10.7 110/11/14 at FLORIDA 53 -2.5 44.5 30-27 W W O 195 3.9 110 5.0 0 123 3.8 183 7.3 310/18/14 KENTUCKY 43 -11 49.5 41-3 W W U 303 5.9 120 8.0 1 71 2.6 146 4.1 010/25/14 OLE MISS 58 +4 45 10-7 W W U 264 4.8 142 8.9 4 137 4.0 176 5.2 111/8/14 ALABAMA 68 +6.5 46 13-20 L L U 183 3.3 76 2.9 1 106 3.7 209 4.5 111/15/14 at ARKANSAS 57 +2 45 0-17 L L U 36 1.1 87 4.0 1 95 2.5 169 6.3 011/27/14 at TEXAS A&M 50 -3 53 23-17 W W U 384 6.7 107 5.1 1 84 4.0 144 5.3 2



(243) NOTRE DAME [SU:7-5 | ATS:5-7]

Head Coach: Brian Kelly • Conference: Independent

(244) LSU (-7 | 52.5) [SU:8-4 | ATS:8-4]Head Coach: Les Miles • Conference: SEC


Notre Dame 52 52.5

LSU -8.5 -7


57

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


57


LP FIELD (NASHVILLE, TN)

• LSU is 11-4 ATS(L5Y) - as favorite of 7 or less points• NOTRE DAME is 1-8 ATS(S2000) at NEUTRAL SITE - In Bowl Games• NOTRE DAME is 10-3 UNDER(L3Y) - Against resilient defenses allowing more than 17.25 yards per

point(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?243 NOTRE DAME 52.5 47 21.7 26.6 ND 25.6 244 LSU -7 56 -8.5 31.6 26.5 30.5

RECENT NOTRE DAME BOWL GAME LOG RECENT LSU BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/24/08 HAWAII (Hawaii) 49-21 W -2.5 W 48.5O 1/1/10 PENN ST (Capital One) 17-19 L -2 L 40U12/31/10 MIAMI FL (Sun) 33-17 W 3 W 48O 1/7/11 TEXAS A&M (Cotton) 41-24 W -1.5 W 48.5O12/29/11 FLORIDA ST (Champs Sports) 14-18 L 3 L 47.5U 1/9/12 ALABAMA (Bcs Championship Game) 0-21 L 2.5 L 42U1/7/13 ALABAMA (Bcs Championship Game) 14-42 L 10 L 39.5O 12/31/12 CLEMSON (Chick-Fil-A Peach) 24-25 L -5.5 L 58U12/28/13 RUTGERS (Pinstripe) 29-16 W -15 L 54U 1/1/14 IOWA (Outback) 21-14 W -7.5 L 48U

RECENT NOTRE DAME BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT LSU BOWL GAME TRENDS* NOTRE DAME is 0-3 ATS in L3 bowl games and 3-12 ATS in L15 * LSU is 0-3 ATS in L3 bowl games, scoring just 15 PPG* FAVORITES are 11-1 SU & 10-2 ATS in L12 IRISH bowl games * UNDER the total is 5-1 in L6 LSU bowl games* NOTRE DAME is 0-3 ATS in L3 bowls vs. SEC, avg loss 24.3 PPG * UNDERDOGS are 7-5 SU & 8-4 ATS in L12 LSU bowl games

The last Irish-Tigers meeting before this Music City Bowl matchup came in the 2007 Sugar Bowl. It was an LSU blowout - 41-14 as 9-point favorites in a game with a total of 56. Prior to that, the teams met nine times from 1970-1998, including a 1997 Independence Bowl matchup - another LSU SU/ATS win: 27-9. LSU is 12-5 SU in bowls since 1995.

Any bowl that lands Notre Dame in its game is usually thrilled each year, but the Music City Bowl has to be extra-ecstatic to field a matchup between the Irish and another big name program, LSU. Both schools are making their first appearance in Nashville, TN for the contest. This is also the first time in nine years that the SEC team is not squaring off with an ACC program. SEC teams owned a 6-2 SU & 4-3-1 ATS edge in that span. UNDER the total is a profitable 9-4 in this bowl series since 2001. The Music City game has been among the more competitive on the bowl menu during that stretch, with the largest victory margin being just 15 points, and 11 of the 15 games being decided by a single score margin.

Jason says: Let’s quickly go back through a list of Notre Dame’s recent bowl wins and losses and see if we can’t come up with a pattern…wins over: Rutgers, Miami, Hawaii, losses to: Alabama, Florida State, LSU, Ohio State. It seems pretty obvious to me that the Irish are able to not only compete but beat teams that are less talented than them in bowl games. Alternatively, when matched up against national powers with slews of top recruits on the roster, they wither. Well, in which category do you put LSU’s 2014 team? Me too, the latter. The interesting thing is that this trend seemd to ring true throughout the regular season as well, with Notre Dame losing to the likes of Florida State, Arizona State, USC etc. Simply put, the Tigers have the better players and a coach that gets it done better in bowl games.

RECENT MUSIC CITY BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/27/09 CLEMSON (ACC) 21 KENTUCKY (SEC) 13 -6.5 52.5 CLEMSON (ACC) CLEMSON (ACC) FAV FAV UNDER12/30/10 TENNESSEE (SEC) 27 NORTH CAROLINA (ACC) 30 -1 50 NORTH CAROLINA (ACC) NORTH CAROLINA (ACC) DOG DOG OVER12/30/11 MISSISSIPPI ST (SEC) 23 WAKE FOREST (ACC) 17 -7 49 MISSISSIPPI ST (SEC) WAKE FOREST (ACC) FAV DOG UNDER12/31/12 VANDERBILT (SEC) 38 NC STATE (ACC) 24 -7.5 54 VANDERBILT (SEC) VANDERBILT (SEC) FAV FAV OVER12/30/13 OLE MISS (SEC) 25 GEORGIA TECH (ACC) 17 -2.5 55.5 OLE MISS (SEC) OLE MISS (SEC) FAV FAV UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Tuesday, December 30, 2014 - (243) NOTRE DAME vs. (244) LSU (-7)LSU LSU* LSU Notre Dame LSU LSU Notre Dame LSU

Tuesday, December 30, 2014 - (243) NOTRE DAME vs. (244) LSU - TOTAL (52.5)UNDER OVER OVER* UNDER OVER OVER OVER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


58




This is the 12th playing of this bowl and far and away this is the best matchup they have put together. Both schools are 9-3, though Georgia is the more disappointed participant, as most would agree the Bulldogs should have won at least one more time this season. Georgia has the ability to dominate on both sides of the line of scrimmage, but it doesn’t always play like it wants to which has everyone pointing fingers at coach Mark Richt. Senior QB Hutson Mason will no doubt want to cap his career with a 10-win season. Louisville seniors like WR Devante Parker are seeking a third 10-win season themselves, which would make them one of the most decorated classes in school history. While the components are in place for offense, these are two top 20 defenses (Cardinals 6th and Bulldogs 20th), which could makes this a lower scoring affair.

BELK BOWL • 6:30 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 30, 2014

LOUISVILLE (20) 32.6 20 40-149 [3.7] 32-18-247 [7.7] 12.1 20.5 15 32-95 [3.0] 32-17-199 [6.2] 14.3 +5 +12.1 GEORGIA (13) 41.7 23 42-255 [6.1] 25-17-200 [8.0] 10.9 21.2 19 42-177 [4.2] 28-15-157 [5.6] 15.8 +15 +20.5 LOUISVILLE 28.2 17 40-119 [3.0] 29-15-225 [7.7] 12.2 17.0 14 35-100 [2.9] 29-15-174 [5.9] 16.1 +3 +11.2 GEORGIA 39.4 22 41-216 [5.2] 26-19-222 [8.5] 11.1 27.8 21 42-197 [4.7] 27-15-166 [6.2] 13.1 +11 +11.6

LOUISVILLE 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO9/1/14 MIAMI FL 47 -4.5 55 31-13 W W U 130 3.0 206 7.4 2 70 2.6 174 6.0 39/6/14 MURRAY ST 12 -35 64 66-21 W W O 325 6.6 278 7.1 0 41 2.2 251 6.6 19/13/14 at VIRGINIA 46 -4 44.5 21-23 L L U 79 2.9 203 4.7 4 114 2.9 171 5.7 39/20/14 at FLA INTERNATIONAL 27 -25.5 45 34-3 W W U 12 0.3 324 9.0 2 88 2.2 117 4.5 39/27/14 WAKE FOREST 29 -21.5 44 20-10 W L U 215 4.4 206 6.4 3 -22 -1.0 122 3.6 310/3/14 at SYRACUSE 37 -1.5 46.5 28-6 W W U 178 3.7 174 7.9 2 59 2.4 196 5.3 210/11/14 at CLEMSON 53 +9 46.5 17-23 L W U 52 1.4 212 7.1 2 72 2.3 157 4.0 210/18/14 NC STATE 43 -19 49 30-18 W L U 166 5.0 203 5.6 0 128 4.1 223 7.0 110/30/14 FLORIDA ST 58 +3.5 51 31-42 L L O 158 4.8 330 8.7 2 173 5.8 401 8.4 311/8/14 at BOSTON COLLEGE 46 -3 45.5 38-19 W W O 166 4.2 257 10.7 1 166 3.9 166 8.3 411/22/14 at NOTRE DAME 47 +2.5 51 31-28 W W O 229 4.6 180 8.6 1 99 3.4 236 9.8 111/29/14 KENTUCKY 43 -13.5 52 44-40 W L O 83 2.1 389 11.1 4 151 3.7 176 6.1 2GEORGIA 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 CLEMSON 53 -9.5 56 45-21 W W O 328 8.0 131 5.0 1 102 2.3 189 5.9 19/13/14 at SOUTH CAROLINA 50 -6.5 58 35-38 L L O 217 5.7 191 8.7 0 176 4.2 271 9.0 29/20/14 TROY 19 -41 63.5 66-0 W W O 367 9.4 180 8.2 0 47 1.7 169 5.1 29/27/14 TENNESSEE 49 -19.5 57 35-32 W L O 289 5.5 147 5.9 2 117 3.4 284 6.5 210/4/14 VANDERBILT 30 -33 53 44-17 W L O 243 6.9 202 9.2 1 132 3.7 188 6.1 110/11/14 at MISSOURI 52 -3 57.5 34-0 W W U 210 3.6 169 5.8 0 50 2.3 97 4.6 510/18/14 at ARKANSAS 57 -3 54 45-32 W W O 207 5.3 179 10.5 0 126 3.4 296 6.6 411/1/14 vs. FLORIDA 53 -11.5 45.5 20-38 L L O 141 4.4 319 7.6 1 418 7.0 27 4.5 111/8/14 at KENTUCKY 43 -9.5 57.5 63-31 W W O 305 7.8 254 12.1 1 214 4.6 139 4.5 111/15/14 AUBURN 60 -3 72 34-7 W W U 289 5.6 123 6.5 0 150 4.3 142 5.1 311/22/14 CHARLESTON SOUT 24 -43 58.5 55-9 W W O 270 7.3 310 11.9 2 190 4.2 21 1.2 211/29/14 GEORGIA TECH 56 -11 66.5 24-30 L L U 194 5.0 194 6.9 3 399 5.7 64 4.0 2



(245) LOUISVILLE [SU:9-3 | ATS:7-5]

Head Coach: Bobby Petrino • Conference: ACC

(246) GEORGIA (-7 | 56.5) [SU:9-3 | ATS:7-5]Head Coach: Mark Richt • Conference: SEC


Louisville 59.5 56.5

Georgia -7.5 -7


59

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


59


BANK OF AMERICA STADIUM (CHARLOTTE, NC)

• LOUISVILLE is 8-2-1 ATS(L5Y) - Against elite rushing teams averaging more than 5.0 yards per carry(CS)

• GEORGIA is 4-9 ATS(L5Y) - Against solid rushing defenses yielding less than 3.35 yards per carry(CS)

• GEORGIA is 7-2 OVER(CS) - On grass field

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?245 LOUISVILLE 56.5 52 23.7 22.4 18.6 UNDER246 GEORGIA -7 61 -8.5 35.8 GEO 30.3 30.7 GEO

RECENT LOUISVILLE BOWL GAME LOG RECENT GEORGIA BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

1/2/07 WAKE FOREST (Orange) 24-13 W -11 W 53.5U 12/28/09 TEXAS A&M (Independence) 44-20 W -6 W 65.5U12/21/10 SOUTHERN MISS (St Peterburg) 31-28 W -2 W 58.5O 12/31/10 UCF (Liberty) 6-10 L -7 L 53.5U12/27/11 NC STATE (Belk) 24-31 L 1.5 L 44O 1/2/12 MICHIGAN ST (Outback) 30-33 L -2 L 48O1/2/13 FLORIDA (Sugar) 33-23 W 14 W 47.5O 1/1/13 NEBRASKA (Capital One) 45-31 W -9.5 W 61.5O12/28/13 MIAMI FL (Russell Athletic) 36-9 W -5.5 W 60U 1/1/14 NEBRASKA (Gator) 19-24 L -9.5 L 61U

RECENT LOUISVILLE BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT GEORGIA BOWL GAME TRENDS* LOUISVILLE is on a 4-1 SU & ATS surge in bowl games * GEORGIA has dropped three of L4 bowl games SU & ATS* FAVORITES are 9-1 SU & 8-2 ATS in L10 LOUISVILLE bowl games * GEORGIA is on a 4-0 SU & ATS run in bowl games vs ACC foes* Six of L8 CARDINALS bowl games went OVER the total * Five of L7 GEORGIA bowl games went UNDER the total

These 9-3 teams are matched for the first time in Charlotte’s Belk Bowl. Georgia’s last two bowl games were against Nebraska (1-1 SU/ATS). They have lost three of their last four SU, but are 8-4 SU since 2002. Mark Richt is 8-5 SU in 13 consecutive bowl appearances. The Cardinals are on a 2-0 SU and ATS bowl move.

Only once in the L7 years has the Belk Bowl in Charlotte, NC not hosted a team from the state of North Carolina. This year’s matchup between Louisville and Georgia will be #2 in that span. This game has had a pair of different names in its 10-year history, but one thing is for certain regardless of the name, home field advantage has proven important. In fact, teams from the state of North Carolina are on a 6-2 ATS run in the game. Unfortunately, we can’t call on that trend this season. Instead, we might choose to look at the favorites, in this case the Bulldogs, as favorites are on a nice run of 8-1 SU & 6-3 ATS in the L9 games. Or perhaps a look at a correlated parlay might work out, with OVER the total being 4-0 in the past games that underdogs covered.

Consensus says: While none of our human experts categorized the Belk Bowl as a Best Bet for them, there was fairly heavy consensus leans on both the side and total wagering options. On the side, six of our seven picks went with Georgia while only Steve Makinen sided with Louisville. It seems that the strength of the SEC is shining through in those selections, as perhaps everyone but Steve is seeing two different level teams squaring off. The teams share identical records but Georgia is the touchdown favorite in a bowl game series typically dominated by favorites. On the total, the lean edge was 5-2 in favor of the UNDER. With Louisville QB Will Gardner and Georgia RB Todd Gurley both out, each team is missing a key offensive weapon.

RECENT BELK BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/26/09 PITTSBURGH (BEAST) 19 NORTH CAROLINA (ACC) 17 -1 46 PITTSBURGH (BEAST) PITTSBURGH (BEAST) FAV FAV UNDER12/31/10 CLEMSON (ACC) 26 SOUTH FLORIDA (BEAST) 31 -5 40.5 SOUTH FLORIDA (BEAST) SOUTH FLORIDA (BEAST) DOG DOG OVER12/27/11 NC STATE (ACC) 31 LOUISVILLE (BEAST) 24 -1.5 44 NC STATE (ACC) NC STATE (ACC) FAV FAV OVER12/27/12 CINCINNATI (BEAST) 48 DUKE (ACC) 34 -8.5 62.5 CINCINNATI (BEAST) CINCINNATI (BEAST) FAV FAV OVER12/28/13 NORTH CAROLINA (ACC) 39 CINCINNATI (AAC) 17 -2.5 59.5 NORTH CAROLINA (ACC) NORTH CAROLINA (ACC) FAV FAV UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Tuesday, December 30, 2014 - (245) LOUISVILLE vs. (246) GEORGIA (-7)Georgia Georgia Georgia Louisville Georgia Georgia Georgia Georgia

Tuesday, December 30, 2014 - (245) LOUISVILLE vs. (246) GEORGIA - TOTAL (56.5)UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER OVER OVER UNDER UNDER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


60




Maryland had a 35-10 lead over Rutgers in their season finale and were ready to assume 2014 as a success with an 8-4 record in their initial run through the Big Ten. But the Terps were outscored 31-3 and lost and have to pick up the pieces against one of the most physical teams they will face this season in Stanford. At least Maryland should have back WR Stefon Diggs, who makes their offense explosive. After four BCS bowl appearances, it was a shock to see Stanford at 5-5, before they won their last two contests. Three of the defeats were by three points each and in each instance the Cardinal were in position to win. Even in an off-year, Stanford was fifth in total defense and if QB Kevin Hogan can perform like he did the last two contests, Maryland could be in a heap of trouble.

FOSTER FARMS BOWL • 10:00 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 30, 2014

MARYLAND 29.1 18 33-131 [3.9] 33-18-221 [6.8] 12.1 28.9 22 45-202 [4.5] 36-20-236 [6.6] 15.2 0 +0.2 STANFORD 25.7 20 36-155 [4.3] 30-19-232 [7.8] 15.1 16.0 17 35-112 [3.2] 34-19-176 [5.2] 18.0 -5 +9.7

MARYLAND 24.2 16 33-93 [2.8] 30-16-216 [7.3] 12.8 23.2 21 45-217 [4.8] 32-15-170 [5.3] 16.7 0 +1.0 STANFORD 21.5 20 37-141 [3.8] 29-18-215 [7.4] 16.6 21.3 21 37-145 [3.9] 36-20-205 [5.6] 16.4 -1 +0.2

MARYLAND 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 JAMES MADISON 29 -24.5 49.5 52-7 W W O 285 5.7 186 5.3 1 161 3.7 141 3.8 39/6/14 at SOUTH FLORIDA 29 -11 53 24-17 W L U 116 2.9 201 7.2 6 83 2.2 174 4.7 19/13/14 WEST VIRGINIA 52 -3.5 61 37-40 L L O 163 6.0 284 7.5 1 183 3.1 511 10.4 49/20/14 at SYRACUSE 37 +1.5 56.5 34-20 W W U 89 2.8 280 10.8 0 370 7.3 219 7.8 29/27/14 at INDIANA 34 +2.5 70 37-15 W W U 123 3.4 361 10.9 0 206 4.4 126 3.4 110/4/14 OHIO ST 62 +6 58 24-52 L L O 66 2.8 244 6.1 4 269 5.1 264 11.0 010/18/14 IOWA 47 -4 45.5 38-31 W W O 212 4.6 206 6.2 2 116 3.7 317 5.7 310/25/14 at WISCONSIN 56 +9.5 56 7-52 L L O 46 1.6 129 4.4 1 311 6.3 216 9.4 011/1/14 at PENN ST 42 +3 43.5 20-19 W W U 35 1.2 161 4.2 2 42 1.0 177 4.2 411/15/14 MICHIGAN ST 62 +10.5 58 15-37 L L U 6 0.4 246 5.7 4 242 5.1 240 7.7 011/22/14 at MICHIGAN 42 +6.5 43.5 23-16 W W U 147 4.2 165 6.9 0 292 6.5 106 4.4 111/29/14 RUTGERS 38 -7.5 53 38-41 L L O 281 7.8 195 8.1 0 144 4.1 347 8.3 2STANFORD 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 CAL DAVIS 16 -42.5 52 45-0 W W U 149 4.7 312 10.4 3 61 2.3 54 2.5 39/6/14 USC 55 -3 52.5 10-13 L L U 128 3.4 285 9.5 2 156 4.2 135 6.1 09/13/14 ARMY 26 -29.5 54.5 35-0 W W U 199 6.2 216 7.7 1 198 3.5 9 1.8 29/27/14 at WASHINGTON 50 -7.5 49 20-13 W L U 186 4.7 178 6.8 3 81 2.1 98 3.3 010/4/14 at NOTRE DAME 47 -3 46.5 14-17 L L U 47 1.5 158 4.4 2 129 4.0 241 5.6 210/10/14 WASHINGTON ST 40 -16.5 52 34-17 W W U 193 5.8 284 8.1 1 -26 -2.4 292 4.2 110/18/14 at ARIZONA ST 54 -3.5 53.5 10-26 L L U 76 3.5 212 5.4 2 114 2.5 242 7.1 010/25/14 OREGON ST 41 -13 43.5 38-14 W W O 151 4.3 287 9.6 2 12 0.4 209 5.5 011/1/14 at OREGON 68 +7 56.5 16-45 L L O 132 3.4 296 9.0 2 267 5.8 258 8.3 111/15/14 UTAH 46 -10 41 17-20 L L U 190 5.0 104 3.7 1 70 2.2 177 6.3 011/22/14 at CALIFORNIA 41 -5 56 38-17 W W U 204 4.3 214 10.2 1 179 5.0 231 5.8 511/28/14 at UCLA 54 +6.5 48.5 31-10 W W U 202 4.5 234 12.3 0 100 3.8 162 4.0 1



(247) MARYLAND [SU:7-5 | ATS:6-6]

Head Coach: Randy Edsall • Conference: Big Ten

(248) STANFORD (-14 | 47.5) [SU:7-5 | ATS:6-6]Head Coach: David Shaw • Conference: Pac-12


Maryland 49 47.5

Stanford -14 -14


61

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


61


LEVIS STADIUM (SANTA CLARA, CA)

• STANFORD is 17-6 ATS(L5Y) - Against opportunistic offenses averaging less than 12.35 yards per point(CS)

• MARYLAND is 4-9 ATS(L2Y) - Against decent offensive teams averaging more than 5.7 yards per play(CS)

• STANFORD is 10-1 UNDER(L3Y) - Against tough-luck defenses allowing less than 16.7 yards per point(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?247 MARYLAND 47.5 42 19.4 21.3 MAR 19.5 MAR248 STANFORD -14 56 -14 29.4 29.2 22.1 UNDER

RECENT MARYLAND BOWL GAME LOG RECENT STANFORD BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/29/06 PURDUE (Champs Sports) 24-7 W 1.5 W 56U 12/31/09 OKLAHOMA (Sun) 27-31 L 10.5 W 54.5O12/28/07 OREGON ST (San Francisco) 14-21 L 4 L 47U 1/3/11 VIRGINIA TECH (Orange) 40-12 W -3.5 W 58.5U12/30/08 NEVADA (Humanitarian) 42-35 W 2 W 61O 1/2/12 OKLAHOMA ST (Fiesta) 38-41 L 4.5 W 73O12/29/10 EAST CAROLINA (Military) 51-20 W -8 W 70.5O 1/1/13 WISCONSIN (Rose) 20-14 W -4 W 46.5U12/27/13 MARSHALL (Military) 20-31 L 2.5 L 64U 1/1/14 MICHIGAN ST (Rose) 20-24 L -7.5 L 41.5O

RECENT MARYLAND BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT STANFORD BOWL GAME TRENDS* MARYLAND lost LY but is 5-2 SU & ATS in L7 bowl games * STANFORD is 6-2 ATS in L8 bowl games* Five of L7 MARYLAND bowl games went UNDER the total * UNDERDOGS are 6-2 ATS in STANFORD's L8 bowl games* TERPS lost to Oregon St in '07 in last bowl game vs Pac 12 foe * STANFORD is 5-1 UNDER total as bowl game chalk, allowing 16 PPG

It’s a cross-country trip for the Terps and a home-area game for the Cardinal, as this bowl previously known as the Fight Hunger and Emerald Bowl moves from the Giants’ AT&T Park to the new Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara. These teams have never met. Stanford’s David Shaw has split the last two Rose Bowls SU/ATS, and lost the 2011 Fiesta Bowl.

The San Francisco area has hosted a bowl game every year since 2002, but for the 2014 game, much has changed, primarily a new name and a new venue. Beautiful new Levi’s Stadium hosts the Foster Farms Bowl, and welcomes Maryland and Stanford for the festivities. The Cardinal will look to keep the momentum going in San Francisco for the Pac 12, as teams from that league were 5-1 SU & 4-2 ATS in their L6 tries in this bowl series. Favorites have also won seven straight games while going 5-2 ATS. Strike another edge up for Stanford, who is actually the largest favorite on the board this bowl season. Don’t ignore the total however, as there is a nice pattern there as well, 6-1 UNDER since 2007.

Jim says: Is there really a 14-point difference between two teams that share identical records out of the Big Ten and Pac 12 conferences? That is the key question we have to answer as we analyze the Foster Farm’s Bowl game. It can of course be argued that Stanford will enjoy a tremendous home field advantage playing in Santa Clara, but in truth, it is not the Cardinal’s home field, and how much interest will this game really generate from the fan base after Stanford clearly underperformed this season. This is a team that has played in BCS bowl games in each of the last four seasons and now is relegated to a much lower interest game against a mediocre foe. Which team do you think will be more amped to play? Me too…Maryland.

RECENT SAN FRANCISCO BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/26/09 USC (P12) 24 BOSTON COLLEGE (ACC) 13 -7.5 45 USC (P12) USC (P12) FAV FAV UNDER1/9/11 NEVADA (WAC) 20 BOSTON COLLEGE (ACC) 13 -7.5 54 NEVADA (WAC) BOSTON COLLEGE (ACC) FAV DOG UNDER12/31/11 ILLINOIS (B10) 20 UCLA (P12) 14 -3 45 ILLINOIS (B10) ILLINOIS (B10) FAV FAV UNDER12/29/12 ARIZONA ST (P12) 62 NAVY (IND) 28 -12 55 ARIZONA ST (P12) ARIZONA ST (P12) FAV FAV OVER12/27/13 WASHINGTON (P12) 31 BYU (IND) 16 -6 65.5 WASHINGTON (P12) WASHINGTON (P12) FAV FAV UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Tuesday, December 30, 2014 - (247) MARYLAND vs. (248) STANFORD (-14)Maryland* Stanford Stanford Maryland Stanford Maryland Maryland Maryland

Tuesday, December 30, 2014 - (247) MARYLAND vs. (248) STANFORD - TOTAL (47.5)UNDER OVER* OVER OVER* OVER OVER UNDER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


62




In late October, these two clubs were very much in play to be Final Four participants. However, injuries and some bad luck clipped Ole Miss, who eventually finished 9-3 (8-4 ATS) and is still one of the better teams in the country. The Rebels – Land Shark – defense completed the season 13th overall, but they will be severely tested by TCU’s fast-paced multi-pronged attack. Arguably the most fascinating player in college football was Horned Frogs QB Trevone Boykin, who was a wide receiver last season but took this offense like a frog to water with the second-best scoring offense at 46.8 PPG. Look for TCU to be fired up, believing they were “jobbed” by the Final Four committee. Mississippi had trouble with Auburn’s multiple offense and the Frogs’ is more dynamic. If QB Bo Wallace can be accurate, Baylor proved the TCU’s secondary can be scored on down the field.

CHICK-FIL-A BOWL • 12:30 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 31, 2014

OLE MISS (9) 30.4 21 37-168 [4.6] 33-21-276 [8.3] 14.6 13.8 18 39-134 [3.4] 30-18-188 [6.2] 23.3 +7 +16.6 TCU (6) 46.8 26 39-209 [5.4] 41-25-333 [8.1] 11.6 20.3 17 39-117 [3.0] 35-17-242 [7.0] 17.7 +18 +26.5 OLE MISS 23.6 21 37-122 [3.3] 33-20-272 [8.2] 16.7 15.2 20 40-144 [3.6] 32-20-204 [6.4] 22.9 +2 +8.4 TCU 45.4 22 38-179 [4.8] 38-22-285 [7.5] 10.2 26.2 21 45-144 [3.2] 37-20-274 [7.4] 16.0 +10 +19.2

OLE MISS 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/28/14 vs. BOISE ST 51 -9.5 51.5 35-13 W W U 71 2.1 387 10.8 3 135 3.6 264 5.5 49/6/14 vs. VANDERBILT 30 -18 49.5 41-3 W W U 180 3.6 367 9.7 1 107 4.3 60 2.4 19/13/14 LA LAFAYETTE 31 -25.5 59 56-15 W W O 214 6.1 340 9.4 1 193 5.2 129 4.2 49/27/14 MEMPHIS 47 -20.5 58 24-3 W W U 178 4.2 248 6.7 4 23 0.7 81 2.6 210/4/14 ALABAMA 68 +4 53 23-17 W W U 72 2.3 251 8.1 1 168 3.8 228 7.4 210/11/14 at TEXAS A&M 50 +2.5 64 35-20 W W U 160 4.6 178 9.4 0 54 1.5 401 7.6 310/18/14 TENNESSEE 49 -15 45.5 34-3 W W U 180 3.8 203 6.5 0 0 0.0 191 5.6 410/25/14 at LSU 56 -4 45 7-10 L L U 137 4.0 176 5.2 1 264 4.8 142 8.9 411/1/14 AUBURN 60 -1 53.5 31-35 L L O 151 5.0 341 8.5 2 253 5.5 254 11.5 111/8/14 PRESBYTERIAN 14 -52.5 49 48-0 W L U 402 11.2 238 7.9 1 89 2.5 67 3.4 211/22/14 at ARKANSAS 57 -3 44.5 0-30 L L U 63 1.9 253 6.7 6 159 3.2 152 8.9 111/29/14 MISSISSIPPI ST 59 +2.5 52.5 31-17 W W U 205 6.6 327 10.5 1 163 3.5 282 7.6 0TCU 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 SAMFORD 28 -32 51.5 48-14 W W O 200 4.3 355 7.1 2 87 1.9 56 2.8 29/13/14 MINNESOTA 48 -17.5 49.5 30-7 W W U 169 6.3 258 5.6 2 99 2.5 169 5.8 59/27/14 at SMU 18 -31 46 56-0 W W O 265 7.0 349 8.1 0 89 2.0 156 4.7 310/4/14 OKLAHOMA 56 +3.5 56.5 37-33 W W O 151 3.9 318 8.2 3 152 3.6 309 8.6 210/11/14 at BAYLOR 63 +7 66 58-61 L W O 139 3.4 346 7.2 1 272 5.0 510 9.3 310/18/14 OKLAHOMA ST 45 -10 62.5 42-9 W W U 261 6.5 415 9.9 1 126 3.2 132 5.3 210/25/14 TEXAS TECH 42 -24.5 71.5 82-27 W W O 305 7.4 480 10.7 0 101 3.6 345 8.4 411/1/14 at WEST VIRGINIA 52 -3 69 31-30 W L U 223 5.3 166 5.5 2 195 3.6 162 6.2 511/8/14 KANSAS ST 57 -6.5 59 41-20 W W O 334 7.0 219 6.4 0 34 1.8 376 9.4 111/15/14 at KANSAS 34 -28 55 34-30 W L O 133 3.7 330 9.2 3 76 2.1 342 9.0 111/27/14 at TEXAS 49 -5 54 48-10 W W O 135 4.4 233 6.9 2 90 2.5 200 5.9 612/6/14 IOWA ST 32 -35 68.5 55-3 W W U 197 5.2 525 11.7 2 84 2.6 152 3.7 2



(249) OLE MISS [SU:9-3 | ATS:8-4]

Head Coach: Hugh Freeze • Conference: SEC

(250) TCU (-3.5 | 57) [SU:11-1 | ATS:10-2]Head Coach: Gary Patterson • Conference: Big 12


Ole Miss 55.5 57

TCU -3 -3.5


63

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


63


THE GEORGIA DOME (ATLANTA, GA)

• MISSISSIPPI is 5-1-1 ATS(S2000) at NEUTRAL SITE - In Bowl Games• TCU is 5-9 ATS(L5Y) - as favorite of 7 or less points• MISSISSIPPI is 10-1 UNDER(L2Y) - Against solid defensive teams allowing less than 22 PPG(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?249 OLE MISS 57 58 24.2 31.8 OVER 31.3 OVER250 TCU -3.5 66 -7.8 30.3 31.5 33.1

RECENT OLE MISS BOWL GAME LOG RECENT TCU BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

1/2/04 OKLAHOMA ST (Cotton) 31-28 W -3 T 59.5U 12/23/08 BOISE ST (Poinsetta) 17-16 W -3 L 46U1/2/09 TEXAS TECH (Cotton) 47-34 W 4 W 66O 1/4/10 BOISE ST (Fiesta) 10-17 L -7.5 L 54.5U1/2/10 OKLAHOMA ST (Cotton) 21-7 W -3.5 W 51U 1/1/11 WISCONSIN (Rose) 21-19 W -3.5 L 54.5U1/5/13 PITTSBURGH (Birmingham) 38-17 W -4 W 54O 12/21/11 LOUISIANA TECH (Poinsetta) 31-24 W -9.5 L 53O12/30/13 GEORGIA TECH (Music City) 25-17 W -2.5 W 55.5U 12/29/12 MICHIGAN ST (Buffalo Wild Wings) 16-17 L -1.5 L 40U

RECENT OLE MISS BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT TCU BOWL GAME TRENDS* OLE MISS is 10-1 SU & 9-1-1 ATS in bowl games since '92 * TCU has lost five straight bowl games ATS, all as favorite* REBELS are on 6-0 SU & 5-0-1 ATS run in bowl games vs Big 12 foes * UNDERDOGS are 11-3 ATS in TCU's L14 bowl games* Three of L4 OLE MISS bowl games went UNDER the total * Six of L7 TCU bowl games have gone UNDER the total

These teams will meet for the seventh time in the Peach Bowl, but the first since 1983, a 20-13 Rebels win. Ole Miss is 5-1 SU, including close wins in the 1956 Cotton Bowl (14-13) and 1948 Delta Bowl (13-9). Gary Patterson is 7-5 SU in bowls, including 6-2 SU since 2005. Hugh Freeze is 2-1 SU/ATS in bowls, with wins over Georgia Tech and Pittsburgh.

While Chick-Fil-A became the title sponsor of former Peach Bowl in 2006, the two rightfully merge back together in 2014, and the game boasts one of the more intriguing matchups of the entire bowl season as Ole Miss squares off with TCU. This will be the first time since ’92 that the game doesn’t pit a team from the ACC against one from the SEC. Ole Miss still represents the latter, but TCU gives the Big 12 a first taste of this game since Baylor played here in 1979. Incidentally, the SEC teams are just 1-4 ATS here over the L5 years. That said, underdogs are on a 15-5-1 ATS run in this game since ’93 and the Rebels will be looking to add a notch to that belt on New Year’s eve. Keep a close eye on the total for this game, as the betting public has nailed it correctly in four straight games. As of presstime, they had a slight lean OVER, bumping the opening number of 56.5 to 57.

Steve Makinen says: In my Conference Article in this bow guide I describe the domination of SEC teams in bowl matchups between it and the Big 12 conference, as SEC teams boast a 16-4 SU & 15-4-1 ATS in head-to-head games since ’03. These games seem to be statement games for the nation’s best league, as there ae always whispers of other conferences perhaps by passing them. In this game, the odds for the SEC are even better, as they are the underdogs. In terms of these two specific teams, let’s not forget the body of work that Ole Miss has put in, owning wins over Boise State, Alabama, Mississippi State, and even Texas A&M when it was playing VERY well. TCU meanwhile, lost to the team that can arguably be considered the only top level team in the Big 12 at this point. The Rebels are also the much better defensive team.

RECENT CHICK-FIL-A PEACH BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/31/09 VIRGINIA TECH (ACC) 37 TENNESSEE (SEC) 14 -5 48 VIRGINIA TECH (ACC) VIRGINIA TECH (ACC) FAV FAV OVER12/31/10 SOUTH CAROLINA (SEC) 17 FLORIDA ST (ACC) 26 -2 53.5 FLORIDA ST (ACC) FLORIDA ST (ACC) DOG DOG UNDER12/31/11 AUBURN (SEC) 43 VIRGINIA (ACC) 24 -3 49.5 AUBURN (SEC) AUBURN (SEC) FAV FAV OVER12/31/12 LSU (SEC) 24 CLEMSON (ACC) 25 -5.5 58 CLEMSON (ACC) CLEMSON (ACC) DOG DOG UNDER12/31/13 TEXAS A&M (SEC) 52 DUKE (ACC) 48 -14 75.5 TEXAS A&M (SEC) DUKE (ACC) FAV DOG OVER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Wednesday, December 31, 2014 - (249) OLE MISS vs. (250) TCU (-3.5)TCU* TCU* TCU Ole Miss* TCU TCU Ole Miss TCU

Wednesday, December 31, 2014 - (249) OLE MISS vs. (250) TCU - TOTAL (57)OVER* OVER UNDER UNDER* OVER UNDER OVER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


64




Boise State has earned a spot in the Big 6 bowls and is on an eight-game win streak. The Broncos defense is not up to past standards (26.5 PPG), but QB Grant Hedrick and RB Jay Ajayi were the main force behind a Boise State offense that gained nearly 500 yards a contest and averaged almost 40 PPG. The Broncos have to be thrilled to be back on a national stage and would once again enjoy proving doubters wrong they don’t belong at this level. While Arizona was surely disappointed to be ousted by Oregon, this is a great consolation prize playing just two hours from home, in what should mostly be a home crowd. Coach Rich Rodriquez is regaining the status he had at West Virginia and his diversified offense can beat opponents running or passing. This contest should have a high entertainment level.

FIESTA BOWL • 4 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 31, 2014

BOISE ST (21) 39.8 24 44-219 [4.9] 32-22-278 [8.7] 12.5 26.5 18 35-141 [4.0] 34-19-225 [6.7] 13.8 +7 +13.3 ARIZONA (12) 34.8 24 40-184 [4.6] 40-22-278 [7.0] 13.3 27.5 24 42-170 [4.0] 38-25-278 [7.3] 16.3 +8 +7.3 BOISE ST 39.8 24 40-188 [4.7] 36-24-305 [8.4] 12.4 32.2 18 41-191 [4.6] 29-17-209 [7.2] 12.4 -1 +7.6 ARIZONA 29.7 21 41-179 [4.3] 33-17-220 [6.7] 13.4 27.0 25 43-184 [4.3] 41-27-282 [6.9] 17.3 +3 +2.7

BOISE ST 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/28/14 vs. OLE MISS 58 +9.5 51.5 13-35 L L U 135 3.6 264 5.5 4 71 2.1 387 10.8 39/6/14 COLORADO ST 44 -8 54 37-24 W W O 324 5.8 352 10.7 1 28 1.2 434 7.5 39/13/14 at CONNECTICUT 23 -15 51.5 38-21 W W O 52 1.9 240 8.3 1 48 1.3 242 6.4 39/20/14 LA LAFAYETTE 31 -17 59.5 34-9 W W U 262 5.5 237 7.6 0 67 2.9 174 4.5 19/27/14 at AIR FORCE 37 -13 57 14-28 L L U 97 3.3 370 6.4 7 287 4.8 48 4.0 210/4/14 at NEVADA 38 -3.5 53.5 51-46 W W O 224 4.7 346 11.2 3 156 5.2 306 7.1 410/17/14 FRESNO ST 35 -18 61 37-27 W L O 264 5.2 228 7.1 1 186 5.5 127 5.1 110/24/14 BYU 44 -6.5 58 55-30 W W O 227 4.7 410 13.2 1 63 2.4 259 6.8 211/8/14 at NEW MEXICO 27 -18 60 60-49 W L O 307 6.1 367 11.5 0 505 10.3 122 7.6 011/15/14 SAN DIEGO ST 40 -14 55.5 38-29 W L O 212 4.5 187 6.7 2 169 4.7 188 6.3 111/22/14 at WYOMING 27 -13.5 51.5 63-14 W W O 312 6.4 246 12.9 1 80 2.1 147 5.1 311/29/14 UTAH ST 42 -10 55 50-19 W W O 283 5.2 215 7.7 1 109 3.6 159 5.7 312/6/14 FRESNO ST 35 -23.5 70 28-14 W L U 149 4.5 155 9.7 0 70 1.7 332 7.2 3ARIZONA 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/29/14 UNLV 22 -20.5 58.5 58-13 W W O 353 7.4 434 9.4 0 119 3.8 252 6.1 19/4/14 at TX-SAN ANTONIO 27 -7.5 55 26-23 W L U 223 5.1 231 7.2 0 121 3.1 228 6.9 19/13/14 NEVADA 38 -20 66.5 35-28 W L U 229 6.0 278 10.7 1 108 2.7 321 8.2 09/20/14 CALIFORNIA 41 -7 70 49-45 W L O 107 3.3 520 7.0 2 193 4.6 380 12.7 210/2/14 at OREGON 68 +21.5 81.5 31-24 W W U 208 3.8 287 9.3 2 144 3.5 302 9.2 210/11/14 USC 55 -1 66.5 26-28 L L U 77 2.7 395 5.5 1 239 6.1 185 6.2 210/25/14 at WASHINGTON ST 40 -2.5 73.5 59-37 W W O 157 4.4 294 7.7 1 54 2.7 489 6.2 211/1/14 at UCLA 54 +6.5 70.5 7-17 L L U 80 2.6 175 3.6 1 271 4.6 189 7.3 111/8/14 COLORADO 37 -18.5 68.5 38-20 W L U 288 6.1 211 5.6 0 94 2.6 259 6.6 411/15/14 WASHINGTON 50 -8 59 27-26 W L U 133 3.3 242 6.1 3 245 4.1 259 8.6 311/22/14 at UTAH 46 +5.5 53 42-10 W W U 298 6.3 222 10.1 1 213 5.0 171 4.9 411/28/14 ARIZONA ST 54 -1.5 65 42-35 W W O 125 3.4 208 9.9 2 113 2.6 267 6.1 212/5/14 vs. OREGON 68 +14.5 72.5 13-51 L L U 111 3.2 113 4.3 2 301 5.6 316 7.9 0



(251) BOISE ST [SU:11-2 | ATS:7-6]

Head Coach: Bryan Harsin • Conference: Mountain West

(252) ARIZONA (-3 | 69.5) [SU:10-3 | ATS:5-8]Head Coach: Rich Rodriguez • Conference: Pac-12


Boise St 69 69.5

Arizona -4.5 -3


65

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


65


UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX STADIUM (GLENDALE, AZ)

• BOISE ST is 6-3 ATS(S2000) at NEUTRAL SITE - In Bowl Games• ARIZONA is 3-7 ATS(CS) - Against good teams with 60%+ winning pct(CS)• ARIZONA is 8-2 UNDER(CS) - Against good teams with 60%+ winning pct(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?251 BOISE ST 69.5 51 29.3 UNDER 33.3 35.3 252 ARIZONA -3 53 -1.8 32.2 32.5 34.4

RECENT BOISE ST BOWL GAME LOG RECENT ARIZONA BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

1/4/10 TCU (Fiesta) 17-10 W 7.5 W 54.5U 12/20/08 BYU (Las Vegas) 31-21 W -3 W 62U12/22/10 UTAH (Las Vegas) 26-3 W -16 W 58U 12/30/09 NEBRASKA (Holiday) 0-33 L 2 L 42U12/22/11 ARIZONA ST (Las Vegas) 56-24 W -14 W 65O 12/29/10 OKLAHOMA ST (Alamo) 10-36 L 4.5 L 68.5U12/22/12 WASHINGTON (Las Vegas) 28-26 W -4 L 44O 12/15/12 NEVADA (New Mexico) 49-48 W -8.5 L 79.5O12/24/13 OREGON ST (Hawaii) 23-38 L 4.5 L 67U 12/31/13 BOSTON COLLEGE (Independence) 42-19 W -7 W 57.5O

RECENT BOISE ST BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT ARIZONA BOWL GAME TRENDS* BOISE ST is 2-0 SU & ATS previously in Fiesta Bowl * UNDER the total is 7-2 in L9 ARIZONA bowl games but 0-2 L2* BRONCOS are 9-5 ATS all-time in bowl games but 0-2 ATS L2 * FAVORITES are on a 5-0 SU & 4-1 ATS run in ARIZONA bowl games* FAVORITES are 4-0 SU & 3-1 ATS in L4 BOISE ST bowl games * WILDCATS are on a 2-4 ATS slide as bowl game FAVORITES

Yet another first-time matchup for what should be an interesting Fiesta Bowl. It’s only about a 110-mile trip up I-10 for the Wildcats. Rich Rodriguez is 5-4 SU overall in bowls, and 2-0 with Arizona, albeit with wins in the New Mexico and AdvoCare V100 bowls. The Broncos’ 4-0 SU/ATS bowl streak was broken last year by Oregon State in the Hawaii Bowl.

Boise State is 2-0 SU & ATS historically in the Fiesta Bowl and has provided plenty of lasting memories with those two wins, most notably the Statue of Liberty 2-point play that knocked off Oklahoma in 2007. For 2014, the Broncos take on Arizona, their fourth straight Pac 12 bowl opponent. Teams from that league have done well in the Fiesta Bowl series, going 4-1 SU & 5-0 ATS since ’94. It just so happens that the Wildcats started that trend with a 29-0 win over Miami in the ’94 games. They are favored here, but historically speaking, that would tend to bode well for Boise State, as dogs are on a 6-2 ATS run over the past eight seasons. Three of the L4 games have gone OVER the total, including last year’s 52-42 downing of Baylor by UCF.

Steve Makinen says: Boise State’s upset of Oklahoma in the 2007 Fiesta is well-remembered, and it started a run of 6-2 ATS by underdogs in this bowl game. Now, of course each bowl game is played on its own merits, so as handicappers we have to break down Boise State’s ability to pull an upset in THIS game. Well, I for one like those chances, if for no other reason than the Broncos picked the right time of the season to be playing their best football. In truth, they struggled out of the gate in this first season under new head coach Bryan Harsin, and I guess that was to be expected after a great 8-year run under Chris Petersen. Once it started to click for the Broncos though, it really clicked, as they scored 47.8 PPG during their season ending 8-game win streak. The school also has a history of stepping it up on Pac 12 teams.

RECENT FIESTA BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U1/4/10 TCU (MWC) 10 BOISE ST (WAC) 17 -7.5 54.5 BOISE ST (WAC) BOISE ST (WAC) DOG DOG UNDER1/1/11 OKLAHOMA (B12) 48 CONNECTICUT (BEAST) 20 -16 53.5 OKLAHOMA (B12) OKLAHOMA (B12) FAV FAV OVER1/2/12 OKLAHOMA ST (B12) 41 STANFORD (P12) 38 -4.5 73 OKLAHOMA ST (B12) STANFORD (P12) FAV DOG OVER1/3/13 OREGON (P12) 35 KANSAS ST (B12) 17 -7.5 74 OREGON (P12) OREGON (P12) FAV FAV UNDER1/1/14 BAYLOR (B12) 42 UCF (AAC) 52 -17 74.5 UCF (AAC) UCF (AAC) DOG DOG OVER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Wednesday, December 31, 2014 - (251) BOISE ST vs. (252) ARIZONA (-3)Arizona Arizona* Arizona Boise St* Boise St Boise St Boise St Boise St

Wednesday, December 31, 2014 - (251) BOISE ST vs. (252) ARIZONA - TOTAL (69.5)OVER UNDER OVER OVER UNDER UNDER OVER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


66




The last college football contest of 2014 should be special. Mississippi State was ranked No.1 for a chunk of the season and still completed a remarkable 10-2 (7-5 ATS) campaign. QB Dak Prescott was the leader of the Bulldogs and for the first nine games he was awfully impressive. When the heat got turned up late in the season he became somewhat hesitant and that will not work against Georgia Tech opportunistic defense. Mississippi State’s defense was only 79th nationally yet was 25th against the run, which will matter in this contest. The Yellow Jackets are in the role they love, the underdog. Coach Paul Johnson’s option offense is extremely difficult to stop and they hold the ball for over 34 minutes a game, while ringing up 37 PPG. The Bulldogs have the size and quicks to disrupt timing of Georgia Tech’s defense, but will they want to be cut blocked all night?

ORANGE BOWL • 8 PM ET (ESPN) – DEC 31, 2014

GEORGIA TECH (10) 37.0 25 56-334 [5.9] 15-8-135 [9.2] 12.7 25.1 20 33-168 [5.1] 31-19-228 [7.4] 15.8 +10 +11.9 MISSISSIPPI ST (8) 37.2 25 45-241 [5.3] 31-19-266 [8.6] 13.6 19.4 20 34-126 [3.7] 41-21-285 [6.9] 21.2 +1 +17.8 GEORGIA TECH 40.7 27 58-378 [6.5] 13-6-113 [8.4] 12.1 29.3 23 33-163 [4.9] 36-23-280 [7.9] 15.1 +8 +11.4 MISSISSIPPI ST 30.2 25 46-243 [5.2] 33-20-256 [7.7] 16.5 23.8 19 32-116 [3.7] 39-21-314 [8.0] 18.1 -1 +6.4

GEORGIA TECH 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 WOFFORD 22 -28 49.5 38-19 W L O 226 5.3 282 17.6 0 271 5.8 55 4.2 09/6/14 at TULANE 29 -7 55 38-21 W W O 344 6.0 15 1.9 3 96 3.8 231 6.6 39/13/14 GA SOUTHERN 37 -15.5 55.5 42-38 W L O 348 6.6 188 7.8 0 283 7.4 245 11.1 19/20/14 at VIRGINIA TECH 43 +8 51.5 27-24 W W U 250 5.7 125 6.9 1 127 3.8 297 7.6 310/4/14 MIAMI FL 47 -1.5 58 28-17 W W U 318 4.9 53 7.6 0 107 5.6 245 9.8 210/11/14 DUKE 44 -3.5 58.5 25-31 L L U 282 6.1 201 7.7 3 242 5.1 131 5.0 010/18/14 at NORTH CAROLINA 43 +2.5 68 43-48 L L O 376 7.4 235 13.1 1 189 4.6 390 8.3 110/25/14 at PITTSBURGH 45 +4 56.5 56-28 W W O 465 7.3 147 12.3 1 198 6.4 328 9.4 611/1/14 VIRGINIA 46 -4 53 35-10 W W U 268 4.3 141 10.8 1 22 1.4 262 6.4 211/8/14 at NC STATE 43 -3 62.5 56-23 W W O 479 7.5 70 8.8 2 155 5.5 213 6.1 311/15/14 CLEMSON 53 +2 56.5 28-6 W W U 251 5.0 102 9.3 2 125 3.9 65 3.0 311/29/14 at GEORGIA 61 +11 66.5 30-24 W W U 399 5.7 64 4.0 2 194 5.0 194 6.9 312/6/14 vs. FLORIDA ST 58 +3.5 63.5 35-37 L W O 331 5.6 134 9.6 1 179 5.4 309 10.3 0MISSISSIPPI ST 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 SOUTHERN MISS 23 -30.5 54.5 49-0 W W U 201 4.6 349 10.3 2 71 2.2 212 5.0 39/6/14 UAB 33 -29 58 47-34 W L O 292 5.1 224 7.2 1 113 2.6 435 12.8 19/13/14 at S ALABAMA 28 -14.5 54.5 35-3 W W U 288 6.4 226 9.4 2 57 2.1 288 5.2 49/20/14 at LSU 56 +7 48 34-29 W W O 302 6.2 268 11.2 2 89 2.5 341 9.5 110/4/14 TEXAS A&M 50 -2.5 71 48-31 W W O 289 5.7 270 10.4 2 161 5.2 365 5.9 310/11/14 AUBURN 60 +3 61.5 38-23 W W U 223 5.1 246 7.0 4 232 5.4 209 6.0 410/25/14 at KENTUCKY 43 -14.5 59 45-31 W L O 326 6.4 216 6.5 1 103 3.2 401 9.1 111/1/14 ARKANSAS 57 -10 56 17-10 W L U 128 3.7 331 12.3 3 163 4.3 238 5.4 111/8/14 TENN-MARTIN 26 -44 57.5 45-16 W L O 254 7.9 266 9.9 1 151 4.0 216 5.0 011/15/14 at ALABAMA 68 +10 55 20-25 L W U 138 3.5 290 6.0 3 124 3.9 211 6.8 011/22/14 VANDERBILT 30 -29.5 55.5 51-0 W W U 283 5.5 219 8.8 0 49 1.8 179 5.0 311/29/14 at OLE MISS 58 -2.5 52.5 17-31 L L U 163 3.5 282 7.6 0 205 6.6 327 10.5 1



(253) GEORGIA TECH [SU:10-3 | ATS:9-4]

Head Coach: Paul Johnson • Conference: ACC

(254) MISSISSIPPI ST (-7 | 62) [SU:10-2 | ATS:7-5]Head Coach: Dan Mullen • Conference: SEC


Georgia Tech 59.5 62

Mississippi St -7.5 -7


67

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


67


SUN LIFE STADIUM (MIAMI, FL)

• MISSISSIPPI ST is 11-4 ATS(L5Y) - Against lesser defensive teams yielding more than 5.7 yards per play(CS)

• GEORGIA TECH is 3-8 ATS(S2000) - In December Bowl Games• MISSISSIPPI ST is 8-3 UNDER(L3Y) - Non-conference games

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?253 GEORGIA TECH 62 56 27.4 29.5 22.8 UNDER254 MISSISSIPPI ST -7 59 -3 33.2 32.1 34.0

RECENT GEORGIA TECH BOWL GAME LOG RECENT MISSISSIPPI ST BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

1/5/10 IOWA (Orange) 14-24 L -6 L 51U 12/29/07 UCF (Liberty) 10-3 W 3 W 52.5U12/27/10 AIR FORCE (Independence) 7-14 L 3 L 55U 1/1/11 MICHIGAN (Gator) 52-14 W -3 W 61.5O12/31/11 UTAH (Sun) 27-30 L -1.5 L 49O 12/30/11 WAKE FOREST (Music City) 23-17 W -7 L 49U12/31/12 USC (Sun) 21-7 W 7 W 63.5U 1/1/13 NORTHWESTERN (Gator) 20-34 L 2 L 54.5U12/30/13 OLE MISS (Music City) 17-25 L 2.5 L 55.5U 12/31/13 RICE (Liberty) 44-7 W -7 W 50.5O

RECENT GEORGIA TECH BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT MISSISSIPPI ST BOWL GAME TRENDS* GEORGIA TECH in on a 1-8 SU & 2-7 ATS slide in bowl games * MISSISSIPPI ST is on a run of 6-1 SU & 5-2 ATS in bowl games* YELLOW JACKETS are 0-3 SU & ATS L3 vs. SEC teams in bowl games * FAVORITES have won the L4 MSU bowl games and are 3-1 ATS* Five of L6 GEORGIA TECH bowl games went UNDER the total * BULLDOGS are 1-3 ATS in L4 bowl games vs ACC foes

The Yellow Jackets have won two recent regular-season meetings SU/ATS -- 42-31 as 5.5-point road favorites in 2009, and 38-7 as 7-point home favorites in 2007. Both games finished over the total. Georgia Tech is in the midst of a 1-8 SU bowl tailspin, the win a 21-7 upset of USC (2012 Sun Bowl). A victory gives MSU it’s first-ever 11-win season.

Mississippi State had hoped to be in the college football playoff this season, but a loss to rival Ole Miss in the season finale squelched any thought of that. Instead, the Bulldogs will wrap up the 2014 calendar year in an Orange Bowl contest with Georgia Tech, one of many ACC-SEC showdowns. Historically speaking, the Orange Bowl has been dog dominated, as teams catching the points have won outright in seven of the L11 years while going 8-3 ATS. The Yellow Jackets should be about a TD underdog for this one. The ACC has also won the last two games SU & ATS, after going just 1-5 ATS in the prior six. If you think Tech has a shot to win, consider them heavily on a money line too, as only once in the L18 years did an outright winner not beat the Vegas number.

Jim says: Steve said it would be ok if I shared a tidbit from his conference bowl article in justifying my pick of Georgia Tech in the Orange Bowl. Well, here goes: ACC teams have enjoyed bowl success against teams from the SEC (6-5 SU & 7-4 ATS L11). Going all the way back to ’92, underdogs have covered nearly two of every three bowl games between the ACC & SEC, going 25-13-2 ATS, including 12-5-1 ATS since ’05. In this case, we have Tech as both the ACC team and the underdog, a double whammy if you will. This is a Yellow Jackets team that is tough to prepare for because of its system, and one that fights and claws when down. That is a nice recipe for a bowl game underdog. Plus, Mississippi State figures to be reeling from losing two of the L3 games and fading out of the playoff picture.

RECENT ORANGE BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U1/5/10 GEORGIA TECH (ACC) 14 IOWA (B10) 24 -6 51 IOWA (B10) IOWA (B10) DOG DOG UNDER1/3/11 STANFORD (P12) 40 VIRGINIA TECH (ACC) 12 -3.5 58.5 STANFORD (P12) STANFORD (P12) FAV FAV UNDER1/4/12 CLEMSON (ACC) 33 WEST VIRGINIA (BEAST) 70 -3 64.5 WEST VIRGINIA (BEAST) WEST VIRGINIA (BEAST) DOG DOG OVER1/1/13 FLORIDA ST (ACC) 31 N ILLINOIS (MAC) 10 -15 58 FLORIDA ST (ACC) FLORIDA ST (ACC) FAV FAV UNDER1/3/14 OHIO ST (B10) 35 CLEMSON (ACC) 40 -2.5 71.5 CLEMSON (ACC) CLEMSON (ACC) DOG DOG OVER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Wednesday, December 31, 2014 - (253) GEORGIA TECH vs. (254) MISSISSIPPI ST (-7)Georgia Tech Georgia Tech Georgia Tech Georgia Tech Georgia Tech Georgia Tech Mississippi St Georgia Tech

Wednesday, December 31, 2014 - (253) GEORGIA TECH vs. (254) MISSISSIPPI ST - TOTAL (62)UNDER* UNDER* OVER* UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


68




Last year’s Auburn defense was not sensational, but they made plays. This year’s Tigers wilted down the stretch and they finished 3-4 and 1-6 ATS and surrendered 34.5 PPG in their last six SEC contests. Auburn will have to regroup against a burly Wisconsin offensive line that can push people around. Offensively, QB Nick Marshall leads an offense that plays a rapid pace and was 17th in the country in yardage (489.2). Wisconsin had among the friendliest schedules in the country but losses to LSU and Northwestern hurt them badly. Words can hardly described what happened to the Badgers in the Big Ten championship game; suffice to say they were manhandled. Wisconsin will want to get that taste out of their mouth and free Melvin Gordon for big plays and hope their No.4 defense does wear down from the speed Auburn will bring.

OUTBACK BOWL • 12 PM ET (ESPN2) – JAN 1, 2015

WISCONSIN (17) 34.6 21 46-314 [6.9] 23-13-151 [6.6] 13.4 20.0 14 35-119 [3.4] 25-12-164 [6.6] 14.2 -6 +14.6 AUBURN (19) 35.8 24 47-259 [5.5] 26-16-231 [9.0] 13.7 26.1 21 37-150 [4.1] 33-19-239 [7.3] 14.9 +4 +9.7

WISCONSIN 22.5 18 40-242 [6.0] 27-13-138 [5.2] 16.9 24.5 17 36-139 [3.9] 27-13-209 [7.8] 14.2 -10 -2.0 AUBURN 25.8 23 43-187 [4.3] 32-18-258 [8.1] 17.2 34.4 24 38-186 [4.9] 32-20-253 [7.9] 12.8 +1 -8.6

WISCONSIN 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 vs. LSU 56 +3.5 49 24-28 L L O 268 6.9 50 2.1 2 126 2.7 239 11.4 19/6/14 W ILLINOIS 23 -40.5 52.5 37-3 W L U 167 4.3 289 10.0 1 54 1.8 108 5.1 29/20/14 BOWLING GREEN 29 -27 62.5 68-17 W W O 644 10.7 112 6.2 3 93 3.2 178 5.4 29/27/14 SOUTH FLORIDA 29 -32.5 51 27-10 W L U 294 5.2 160 8.9 1 72 3.8 173 9.1 210/4/14 at NORTHWESTERN 40 -7.5 48 14-20 L L U 284 7.7 138 4.8 4 203 4.4 182 6.3 010/11/14 ILLINOIS 39 -27 59 38-28 W L O 401 8.5 97 5.4 0 153 3.9 135 5.6 110/25/14 MARYLAND 42 -9.5 56 52-7 W W O 311 6.3 216 9.4 0 46 1.6 129 4.4 111/1/14 at RUTGERS 38 -12.5 51.5 37-0 W W U 298 6.5 87 4.4 1 76 2.6 63 2.3 111/8/14 at PURDUE 33 -16.5 51.5 34-16 W W U 264 6.3 225 7.5 2 26 1.0 204 5.5 011/15/14 NEBRASKA 50 -5 55 59-24 W W O 581 11.0 46 4.2 4 118 2.6 62 3.4 511/22/14 at IOWA 47 -9.5 49.5 26-24 W L O 266 6.3 139 9.9 0 101 3.6 311 10.4 111/29/14 MINNESOTA 48 -16.5 49.5 34-24 W L O 233 5.1 215 11.9 1 177 4.0 95 5.3 112/6/14 vs. OHIO ST 62 -4.5 57.5 0-59 L L O 71 1.9 187 4.3 4 301 7.9 257 14.3 0AUBURN 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 ARKANSAS 57 -17.5 56.5 45-21 W W O 302 6.3 293 13.3 1 153 5.3 175 5.6 19/6/14 SAN JOSE ST 27 -34 67.5 59-13 W W O 358 7.2 135 5.9 2 65 1.4 254 7.9 39/18/14 at KANSAS ST 57 -7 64.5 20-14 W L U 128 2.8 231 7.5 1 40 1.3 245 6.1 39/27/14 LOUISIANA TECH 45 -33 59.5 45-17 W L O 254 5.3 219 10.0 0 105 3.2 216 6.2 210/4/14 LSU 56 -7 55 41-7 W W U 298 6.1 268 10.7 1 138 3.8 142 5.9 010/11/14 at MISSISSIPPI ST 59 -3 61.5 23-38 L L U 232 5.4 209 6.0 4 223 5.1 246 7.0 410/25/14 SOUTH CAROLINA 50 -18 62.5 42-35 W L O 395 8.4 156 10.4 1 119 3.6 416 7.8 311/1/14 at OLE MISS 58 +1 53.5 35-31 W W O 253 5.5 254 11.5 1 151 5.0 341 8.5 211/8/14 TEXAS A&M 50 -23.5 68.5 38-41 L L O 363 6.2 219 10.4 3 176 5.0 277 9.6 111/15/14 at GEORGIA 61 +3 72 7-34 L L U 150 4.3 142 5.1 3 289 5.6 123 6.5 011/22/14 SAMFORD 28 -37.5 59.5 31-7 W L U 200 4.3 186 8.5 1 113 3.0 125 4.3 211/29/14 at ALABAMA 68 +10 55.5 44-55 L L O 174 3.7 456 10.6 2 227 6.7 312 11.6 3



(255) WISCONSIN [SU:10-3 | ATS:5-8]

Head Coach: Barry Alvarez • Conference: Big Ten

(256) AUBURN (-6 | 62) [SU:8-4 | ATS:4-8]Head Coach: Gus Malzahn • Conference: SEC


Wisconsin 61 62

Auburn -7 -6


69

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


69


RAYMOND JAMES STADIUM (TAMPA, FL)

• AUBURN is 8-3 ATS(L2Y) - Against elite rushing teams averaging more than 5.0 yards per carry(CS)

• WISCONSIN is 5-9 ATS(L3Y) - Non-conference games• WISCONSIN is 8-2 OVER(L3Y) - Against decent-scoring teams averaging 30 PPG or more(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?255 WISCONSIN 62 56 26.6 28.0 30.4 256 AUBURN -6 60 -3.5 32.3 29.8 32.7

RECENT WISCONSIN BOWL GAME LOG RECENT AUBURN BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/29/09 MIAMI FL (Champs Sports) 20-14 W 3.5 W 55.5U 12/31/07 CLEMSON (Chick-Fil-A Peach) 23-20 W 2 W 44U1/1/11 TCU (Rose) 19-21 L 3.5 W 54.5U 1/1/10 NORTHWESTERN (Outback) 38-35 W -9 L 54.5O1/2/12 OREGON (Rose) 38-45 L 4 L 74O 1/10/11 OREGON (Bcs Championship Game) 22-19 W 1 W 73.5U1/1/13 STANFORD (Rose) 14-20 L 4 L 46.5U 12/31/11 VIRGINIA (Chick-Fil-A Peach) 43-24 W -3 W 49.5O1/1/14 SOUTH CAROLINA (Capital One) 24-34 L -1.5 L 51.5O 1/6/14 FLORIDA ST (Bcs Championship Game)31-34 L 11.5 W 68U

RECENT WISCONSIN BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT AUBURN BOWL GAME TRENDS* WISCONSIN is just 1-6 SU & 2-5 ATS in L7 bowl games * AUBURN is on a 7-2 SU & ATS run in bowl games since '03* WISCONSIN is 6-2 UNDER the total in L8 as bowl game UNDERDOG * UNDERDOGS are 9-4-1 ATS in L14 AUBURN bowl games* BADGERS last played AUBURN in '06 Capital One Bowl & won 24-10 * TIGERS have gone UNDER the total in nine of L11 bowl games

This Outback Bowl matchup is the third bowl meeting between these teams. The Badgers posted a 24-10 win in the 2006 Capital One Bowl, while the Tigers won 28-14 in the 2003 Music City Bowl. The Badgers arrive in this one amidst a coaching change and off an embarrassing loss in the Big 10 championship game. They also are 1-6 SU in bowls L7.

Wisconsin and Auburn kick off the New Year from Tampa in the Outback Bowl. Neither team is a stranger to this game, as Wisconsin has been here four times in the last 20 years while Auburn has appeared twice. This series has been a Big Ten-SEC matchup since the Tigers first played Penn State back in ’96. The SEC has gotten the better of the rivalry in recent years on the scoreboard, going 7-5 since ’03. However, the Big Ten holds a major pointspread edge in that span, boasting a 9-3 ATS mark. SEC teams have been favored in all of the L5 seasons. Those looking to back head coach-less Wisconsin for more reasons than that might consider that underdogs are on an impressive 11-4 ATS run in the series. Four of the L5 games and nine of the L13 have also surpassed the posted total.

Jason says: The argument can certainly be made that so much has happened to Wisconsin in the last week of this writing that the Badgers are certain to be distracted for the Outback Bowl game against Auburn. I, on the other hand, think that Wisconsin was so swift in announcing RB Melvin Gordon’s decision to go pro and the new coach being Paul Chryst, that it will be business as usual for them. In fact, my greater argument stems around why this year’s Auburn team is being considered nearly a touchdown better than Wisconsin? The Badgers boast the country’s best running back as well as one of the best defenses on the college football landscape. The Tigers did little of anything in the second half of the season that could be considered special. These teams are much closer than this line indicates, take Wisconsin to end its bowl losing streak.

RECENT OUTBACK BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U1/1/10 AUBURN (SEC) 38 NORTHWESTERN (B10) 35 -9 54.5 AUBURN (SEC) NORTHWESTERN (B10) FAV DOG OVER1/1/11 FLORIDA (SEC) 37 PENN ST (B10) 24 -7 47.5 FLORIDA (SEC) FLORIDA (SEC) FAV FAV OVER1/2/12 GEORGIA (SEC) 30 MICHIGAN ST (B10) 33 -2 48 MICHIGAN ST (B10) MICHIGAN ST (B10) DOG DOG OVER1/1/13 SOUTH CAROLINA (SEC) 33 MICHIGAN (B10) 28 -5.5 47.5 SOUTH CAROLINA (SEC) MICHIGAN (B10) FAV DOG OVER1/1/14 LSU (SEC) 21 IOWA (B10) 14 -7.5 48 LSU (SEC) IOWA (B10) FAV DOG UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Thursday, January 1, 2015 - (255) WISCONSIN vs. (256) AUBURN (-6)Wisconsin Wisconsin* Auburn Wisconsin Wisconsin Wisconsin Wisconsin Wisconsin

Thursday, January 1, 2015 - (255) WISCONSIN vs. (256) AUBURN - TOTAL (62)OVER OVER OVER UNDER* UNDER UNDER OVER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


70




This is an outstanding appetizer to what lies ahead later in the day on New Year’s. If you did not already know, Art Briles and everyone associated with the Baylor football program is peeved they were not supported enough or taken seriously for their body of work to go to the Final Four. This will make for a group of really angry Bears who will want to prove to the world right before the day’s big doubleheader they should be playing. Yet, if Baylor is not focused on the opponent, Michigan State, being the most physical team Baylor will face, could expose them. QB Conner Cook really grew up this year and the Spartans averaged 43.1 PPG. Both of the Spartans defeats were to Final Four opponents and in each case it was a shoot-out which is something they will have to attempt to avoid against nation’s top scoring crew.

COTTON BOWL • 12:30 PM ET (ESPN) – JAN 1, 2015

MICHIGAN ST (7) 43.1 24 46-235 [5.1] 30-18-262 [8.8] 11.5 19.9 14 29-98 [3.4] 32-16-196 [6.0] 14.8 +20 +23.2 BAYLOR (4) 48.8 30 50-235 [4.7] 39-24-346 [8.9] 11.9 24.2 19 37-108 [2.9] 34-19-260 [7.6] 15.2 +12 +24.6 MICHIGAN ST 39.8 25 44-221 [5.1] 35-20-267 [7.7] 12.3 23.8 14 27-112 [4.1] 34-17-196 [5.8] 12.9 +4 +16.0 BAYLOR 43.8 28 49-201 [4.1] 38-23-310 [8.0] 11.7 26.2 22 37-144 [3.9] 37-20-282 [7.5] 16.3 +11 +17.6

MICHIGAN ST 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/29/14 JACKSONVILLE ST 36 -34.5 49 45-7 W W O 211 4.2 354 14.8 0 22 0.9 222 6.0 39/6/14 at OREGON 68 +14 57 27-46 L L O 123 3.4 343 7.3 2 173 4.3 318 11.4 09/20/14 E MICHIGAN 11 -43 53.5 73-14 W W O 336 5.6 160 8.4 1 20 1.1 115 4.0 69/27/14 WYOMING 27 -28 48.5 56-14 W W O 338 6.5 195 9.8 0 98 3.6 188 7.8 310/4/14 NEBRASKA 50 -6.5 52.5 27-22 W L U 188 4.3 234 8.1 3 47 1.3 282 6.3 410/11/14 at PURDUE 33 -21.5 49 45-31 W L O 294 6.8 238 6.4 1 129 5.2 211 5.7 210/18/14 at INDIANA 34 -16 59.5 56-17 W W O 330 6.5 332 10.4 1 213 6.5 11 0.7 110/25/14 MICHIGAN 42 -16.5 44.5 35-11 W W O 219 4.8 227 10.3 2 65 2.3 121 4.2 311/8/14 OHIO ST 62 -4 55 37-49 L L O 178 5.2 358 8.0 0 268 6.5 300 11.5 211/15/14 at MARYLAND 42 -10.5 58 37-15 W W U 242 5.1 240 7.7 0 6 0.4 246 5.7 411/22/14 RUTGERS 38 -24 57 45-3 W W U 242 5.5 278 10.7 2 95 3.3 139 4.5 311/29/14 at PENN ST 42 -13 43 34-10 W W O 118 2.9 180 6.9 1 38 1.7 195 4.3 2BAYLOR 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/31/14 SMU 18 -31.5 74 45-0 W W U 261 5.2 313 6.7 2 -24 -1.0 91 2.3 39/6/14 NORTHWESTERN ST 25 -46.5 72.5 70-6 W W O 265 5.3 455 16.3 2 78 1.9 124 6.5 19/12/14 at BUFFALO 30 -33 69.5 63-21 W W O 189 4.6 480 13.0 0 139 3.6 255 8.2 19/27/14 at IOWA ST 32 -20.5 72 49-28 W W O 244 5.2 357 7.1 1 127 3.7 212 5.4 110/4/14 at TEXAS 49 -13.5 57 28-7 W W U 278 4.6 111 5.0 0 190 4.8 144 4.2 310/11/14 TCU 66 -7 66 61-58 W L O 272 5.0 510 9.3 3 139 3.4 346 7.2 110/18/14 at WEST VIRGINIA 52 -8 80 27-41 L L U 95 2.3 223 6.0 0 134 2.7 322 9.2 311/1/14 KANSAS 34 -34.5 61.5 60-14 W W O 326 6.3 343 9.5 0 16 0.6 288 9.6 311/8/14 at OKLAHOMA 56 +5 67 48-14 W W U 148 2.8 396 9.2 0 171 5.2 148 5.1 111/22/14 OKLAHOMA ST 45 -32.5 68 49-28 W L O 317 5.5 262 9.0 2 116 2.7 281 11.2 211/29/14 vs. TEXAS TECH 42 -26.5 79 48-46 W L O 255 4.7 292 7.0 1 103 4.0 609 10.7 412/6/14 KANSAS ST 57 -7 71 38-27 W W U 172 4.6 412 10.0 1 103 2.6 300 11.1 1



(257) MICHIGAN ST [SU:10-2 | ATS:8-4]

Head Coach: Mark Dantonio • Conference: Big Ten

(258) BAYLOR (-3 | 72) [SU:11-1 | ATS:8-4]Head Coach: Art Briles • Conference: Big 12


Michigan St 70 72

Baylor -1 -3


71

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


71


AT&T STADIUM (ARLINGTON, TX)

• BAYLOR is 8-2 ATS(L3Y) - Against elite offensive teams averaging more than 6.3 yards per play(CS)

• MICHIGAN ST is 4-7-1 ATS(L3Y) - VS AP top 25• BAYLOR is 9-1 OVER(L5Y) - as favorite of 7 or less points

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?257 MICHIGAN ST 72 62 31.9 UNDER 32.1 MST 26.1 UNDER258 BAYLOR -3 63 0 34.0 30.0 UNDER 37.5 BAY

RECENT MICHIGAN ST BOWL GAME LOG RECENT BAYLOR BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

1/2/10 TEXAS TECH (Alamo) 31-41 L 9.5 L 60O 12/31/94 WASHINGTON ST (Alamo) 3-10 L 6 L 39U1/1/11 ALABAMA (Capital One) 7-49 L 7.5 L 50.5O 12/29/10 ILLINOIS (Texas) 14-38 L 2 L 64.5U1/2/12 GEORGIA (Outback) 33-30 W 2 W 48O 12/29/11 WASHINGTON (Alamo) 67-56 W -8 W 79O12/29/12 TCU (Buffalo Wild Wings) 17-16 W 1.5 W 40U 12/27/12 UCLA (Holiday) 49-26 W 3 W 81U1/1/14 STANFORD (Rose) 24-20 W 7.5 W 41.5O 1/1/14 UCF (Fiesta) 42-52 L -17 L 74.5O

RECENT MICHIGAN ST BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT BAYLOR BOWL GAME TRENDS* MICHIGAN ST has won three straight bowl games after losing prior five * BAYLOR has scored 52.7 PPG in L3 bowl games, going 2-1 SU & ATS* All three recent MSU bowl game wins were upset victories * BAYLOR lost 38-14 to Illinois in last bowl game versus Big Ten foe* Four of L5 MICHIGAN ST bowl games went OVER the total * UNDERDOGS have pulled upsets in L2 BAYLOR bowl games

The only other meeting of these schools came back in 1968, when Duffy Daugherty and Co. won 28-10 at home in East Lansing. Mark Dantonio’s Spartans are on a 3-0 SU bowl run -- all narrow wins over Stanford, TCU and Georgia -- following a 5-game SU losing streak. Point totals in Baylor’s last three bowl games (2-1 SU/ATS): 94, 75 and 123.

Just to clarify, the Cotton Bowl Classic has moved dates, times, and locations for the last four seasons but this game is still recognized as the same bowl series that ran on New Year’s Day in Dallas since 1937, and usually pitted the SEC versus the Big 12. This year’s matchup is Big Ten versus Big 12, and generally considered one of the top non-playoff games on the board for the season. Baylor hoped to be playing in the playoffs but fell short according to the selection committee. The Bears instead “settle” for a nice matchup with Michigan State. The change in conference affiliation is a welcomed variable for the Big 12, as they were just 1-10 SU & 1-9-1 ATS against the SEC in this bowl series since 2004. Furthermore, they hadn’t been within single-digits in any of the L6 games. In terms of favorites/underdogs, the Big 12 was usually the underdog, and thus favorites are on a 6-2 SU & ATS run.

Paul says: Anyone paying attention to how the Final Four was chosen by the bowl committee realizes Baylor is a bunch of angry Bears and will be EXTREMELY motivated to prove they should have chosen. But that is not the only reason Baylor wins and covers this game. In the three games Michigan State allowed more than 30 points they were 0-3 ATS and with the Bears the leading scoring team in the country at 48.1 PPG, it would appear they surpass the 30-point barrier. Also, oddsmakers are telling us the same thing with the total over 70 points. With Baylor 9-2 ATS after gaining 450 or more total yards in five consecutive games, they win by double digits.

RECENT COTTON BOWL CLASSIC GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U1/2/10 OLE MISS (SEC) 21 OKLAHOMA ST (B12) 7 -3.5 51 OLE MISS (SEC) OLE MISS (SEC) FAV FAV UNDER1/7/11 LSU (SEC) 41 TEXAS A&M (B12) 24 -1.5 48.5 LSU (SEC) LSU (SEC) FAV FAV OVER1/6/12 ARKANSAS (SEC) 29 KANSAS ST (B12) 16 -9 65 ARKANSAS (SEC) ARKANSAS (SEC) FAV FAV UNDER1/4/13 TEXAS A&M (SEC) 41 OKLAHOMA (B12) 13 -3 72.5 TEXAS A&M (SEC) TEXAS A&M (SEC) FAV FAV UNDER1/3/14 OKLAHOMA ST (B12) 31 MISSOURI (SEC) 41 -3 62 MISSOURI (SEC) MISSOURI (SEC) DOG DOG OVER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Thursday, January 1, 2015 - (257) MICHIGAN ST vs. (258) BAYLOR (-3)Michigan St Baylor* Baylor* Michigan St Michigan St Michigan St Baylor Michigan St

Thursday, January 1, 2015 - (257) MICHIGAN ST vs. (258) BAYLOR - TOTAL (72)OVER OVER* OVER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


72




Anybody who has Minnesota (8-4 SU & ATS) in a New Year’s Day bowl back in August raise your hand. Coach Jerry Kill has changed the nature of the program and this is tough-minded group that enjoys physical football and has much better athletes than few years ago. The game will feature a fascinating matchup of a strong Minnesota offensive line trying to open holes for RB David Cobb, who is at over 1,500 yards rushing and takes on strong Missouri defensive front known for making negative plays. The Tigers have gotten to the SEC title game in consecutive years and it’s about time coach Gary Pinkel and his team got some props. Missouri only brought back eight starters yet reloaded expertly. For Mizzou to win QB Maty Mauk needs to be more consistent throwing and the defense has to make negative plays on early downs to force Minnesota to pass.

CITRUS BOWL • 1:00 PM ET (ABC) – JAN 2, 2015

MINNESOTA 29.3 18 47-225 [4.8] 18-9-131 [7.1] 12.2 23.4 20 36-161 [4.5] 32-18-201 [6.2] 15.5 +11 +5.9 MISSOURI (16) 27.4 19 38-166 [4.4] 30-16-196 [6.4] 13.2 21.4 20 38-136 [3.5] 34-20-209 [6.1] 16.1 +8 +6.0 MINNESOTA 22.6 18 45-187 [4.2] 24-11-161 [6.8] 15.4 26.0 18 36-156 [4.3] 26-15-185 [7.0] 13.1 -1 -3.4 MISSOURI 31.3 18 38-163 [4.2] 31-15-205 [6.7] 11.8 24.5 19 38-134 [3.6] 35-22-225 [6.3] 14.7 +6 +6.8

MINNESOTA 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/28/14 E ILLINOIS 31 -17.5 63 42-20 W W U 182 4.6 156 8.7 1 99 2.5 310 5.4 39/6/14 MIDDLE TENN ST 29 -14 50 35-24 W L O 284 5.7 67 6.1 1 190 4.4 255 6.7 39/13/14 at TCU 66 +17.5 49.5 7-30 L L U 99 2.5 169 5.8 5 169 6.3 258 5.6 29/20/14 SAN JOSE ST 27 -7 49 24-7 W W U 380 6.6 7 1.0 2 68 2.1 186 5.6 59/27/14 at MICHIGAN 42 +10.5 43.5 30-14 W W O 206 4.4 167 7.3 0 83 3.0 88 3.5 210/11/14 NORTHWESTERN 40 -4 44.5 24-17 W W U 121 3.1 153 10.2 1 124 3.6 269 5.4 110/18/14 PURDUE 33 -12 48.5 39-38 W L O 285 5.5 165 9.2 1 298 8.5 153 5.9 210/25/14 at ILLINOIS 39 -3.5 54 24-28 L L U 171 4.2 240 8.0 3 123 3.0 140 6.1 111/8/14 IOWA 47 +1.5 43 51-14 W W O 291 4.9 138 9.9 0 84 2.8 121 4.7 311/15/14 OHIO ST 62 +11.5 56 24-31 L W U 218 5.0 85 4.3 2 289 7.6 200 8.0 311/22/14 at NEBRASKA 50 +8.5 52 28-24 W W U 281 5.3 135 7.5 0 174 4.6 223 11.2 211/29/14 at WISCONSIN 56 +16.5 49.5 24-34 L W O 177 4.0 95 5.3 1 233 5.1 215 11.9 1MISSOURI 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 S DAKOTA ST 36 -25 53.5 38-18 W L O 215 5.5 178 8.5 0 119 3.7 246 7.7 39/6/14 at TOLEDO 39 -3.5 61 49-24 W W O 177 3.8 325 9.8 2 154 4.8 256 5.8 29/13/14 UCF 45 -10 53.5 38-10 W W U 178 5.1 144 6.0 1 90 2.3 209 5.8 49/20/14 INDIANA 34 -14 71 27-31 L L U 172 4.9 326 6.9 1 241 4.8 252 7.6 09/27/14 at SOUTH CAROLINA 50 +6.5 61 21-20 W W U 148 4.1 132 3.9 0 119 2.8 219 5.9 010/11/14 GEORGIA 61 +3 57.5 0-34 L L U 50 2.3 97 4.6 5 210 3.6 169 5.8 010/18/14 at FLORIDA 53 +7 44.5 42-13 W W O 99 3.2 20 1.1 1 135 2.8 148 4.8 610/25/14 VANDERBILT 30 -21.5 42.5 24-14 W L U 244 5.3 141 6.1 0 44 1.6 196 6.3 111/1/14 KENTUCKY 43 -7.5 47 20-10 W W U 156 3.5 164 5.0 0 100 2.9 158 4.3 111/15/14 at TEXAS A&M 50 +3.5 55 34-27 W W O 335 6.8 252 6.3 1 104 3.9 237 6.6 111/22/14 at TENNESSEE 49 +5.5 48.5 29-21 W W O 180 4.0 230 9.2 0 53 1.8 226 5.9 211/28/14 ARKANSAS 57 +2 43 21-14 W W U 158 3.9 265 6.3 2 155 5.2 133 4.4 212/6/14 vs. ALABAMA 68 +14.5 49 13-42 L L O 41 1.8 272 8.0 1 242 4.9 262 9.7 0



(259) MINNESOTA [SU:8-4 | ATS:8-4]

Head Coach: Jerry Kill • Conference: Big 10

(260) MISSOURI (-5 | 48) [SU:10-3 | ATS:8-5]Head Coach: Gary Pinkel • Conference: SEC


Minnesota 61.5 48

Missouri -7.5 -5


73

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


73


CITRUS BOWL (ORLANDO, FL)

• MISSOURI is 11-2 ATS(L2Y) - Against efficient offenses averaging less than 13.2 yards per point(CS)

• MINNESOTA is 4-6 ATS(S2000) - In Bowl Games• MISSOURI is 11-2 OVER(L2Y) - All Games

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?259 MINNESOTA 48 48 22.9 22.9 17.0 UNDER260 MISSOURI -5 52 -4.5 27.0 26.6 23.8

RECENT MINNESOTA BOWL GAME LOG RECENT MISSOURI BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/29/06 TEXAS TECH (Insight) 41-44 L 8 W 63O 12/29/08 NORTHWESTERN (Alamo) 30-23 W -14 L 66.5U12/31/08 KANSAS (Insight) 21-42 L 9 L 58.5O 12/31/09 NAVY (Texas) 13-35 L -6.5 L 54.5U12/31/09 IOWA ST (Insight) 13-14 L -1.5 L 47U 12/28/10 IOWA (Insight) 24-27 L -3 L 46O12/28/12 TEXAS TECH (Texas) 31-34 L 13 W 55.5O 12/26/11 NORTH CAROLINA (Independence) 41-24 W -4.5 W 54O12/27/13 SYRACUSE (Texas) 17-21 L -3.5 L 48U 1/3/14 OKLAHOMA ST (Cotton) 41-31 W 3 W 62O

RECENT MINNESOTA BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT MISSOURI BOWL GAME TRENDS* MINNESOTA is on 6-game bowl losing streak (2-4 ATS) * UNDERDOGS are on a 6-2 ATS run in MISSOURI bowl games* UNDERDOGS are 9-2 ATS in MINNESOTA bowl games since '99 * MISSOURI is 0-2 ATS in bowl games vs Big Ten foes since '08* MINNESOTA is 3-1 ATS in L4 tries as bowl game underdog * TIGERS have scored 30+ points in seven of L10 bowl games

Buffalo Wild Wings’ sponsorship has moved from Sun Devil Stadium to the Citrus Bowl. The Tigers hold a 4-3 series edge SU, but all seven games were played from 1943-1970. Mizzu has won/covered its last two bowl games -- 41-31 over Oklahoma State and 41-24 over North Carolina. The Gophers have lost six consecutive bowls, but five losses were by four or fewer points.

Buffalo Wild Wings, America’s favorite place for wings & beer, transfers its corporate sponsorship from the bowl game in Tempe to this one at the Citrus Bowl in Orlando. The New Year’s Day scheduling should give the company a higher profile, if that’s possible. Unlike many other games that have switched their conference alignments however, this one remains constant, as Minnesota of the Big Ten takes on Missouri of the SEC. The Tigers will be looking to make it five-in-a-row SU & ATS for the latter. However, Missouri was only here in 1981 and Minnesota has never been so the Gophers are hoping to throw that trend out the window. Keep a close eye on the total for this game, as the betting public has nailed it at a 4-0-1 rate over the L5 years. As of presstime, they had a slight lean UNDER, bumping the opening number of 49 down to 48.

Jim says: This may sound like unusual and simplistic reasoning on the surface but in Minnesota’s six games against bowl teams this season, the average point production was 53.2 PPG. In Missouri’s nine games against bowl teams the average point production was 51.3 PPG. You would figure that the total for this game would be in the low 50’s, no other things considered. Big Ten teams rarely play very well defensively in bowl games either, as Steve indicated in his conference article, they are allowing 29.3 PPG in bowls since ’04. If that weren’t enough, I also saw a 27-5 system indicating to play the OVER in January Bowl games with totals between 42.5 & 49 when one of the teams is hot like Missouri. With weather also figuring to play no factor, I’ll go OVER in this one.

RECENT CITRUS BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U1/1/10 LSU (SEC) 17 PENN ST (B10) 19 -2 40 PENN ST (B10) PENN ST (B10) DOG DOG UNDER1/1/11 ALABAMA (SEC) 49 MICHIGAN ST (B10) 7 -7.5 50.5 ALABAMA (SEC) ALABAMA (SEC) FAV FAV OVER1/2/12 SOUTH CAROLINA (SEC) 30 NEBRASKA (B10) 13 -3 45 SOUTH CAROLINA (SEC) SOUTH CAROLINA (SEC) FAV FAV UNDER1/1/13 GEORGIA (SEC) 45 NEBRASKA (B10) 31 -9.5 61.5 GEORGIA (SEC) GEORGIA (SEC) FAV FAV OVER1/1/14 WISCONSIN (B10) 24 SOUTH CAROLINA (SEC) 34 -1.5 51.5 SOUTH CAROLINA (SEC) SOUTH CAROLINA (SEC) DOG DOG OVER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Thursday, January 1, 2015 - (259) MINNESOTA vs. (260) MISSOURI (-5)Missouri Missouri Minnesota Minnesota Minnesota Minnesota Missouri Minnesota

Thursday, January 1, 2015 - (259) MINNESOTA vs. (260) MISSOURI - TOTAL (48)OVER* OVER UNDER UNDER OVER OVER UNDER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


74




Cannot help but think the first semifinal tilt is like a big time NFL contest with two high profile quarterbacks. Marcus Mariota vs. Jameis Winston is as good as it gets at that position, which should make for real fireworks. Mariota was spectacular with 38 touchdowns and two picks and he has weapons everywhere. The Oregon defense is far from special (80th in YPGA), however, this is their best squad since 2010 title run and the table is set. Of the 15 teams that have put together 29 or more game winning streaks in D-1, suffice to say none have been more heavily criticized than Florida State. Winston is a lightning rod, but he refuses to let his teammates lose and Jimbo Fisher is undoubtedly playing the ‘respect’ card in the locker room. Oregon might be better, yet it is a given Seminoles will not go quietly.

ROSE BOWL • 5:00 PM ET (ESPN) – JAN 1, 2015

FLORIDA ST (2) 34.8 23 32-135 [4.3] 36-23-300 [8.3] 12.5 23.0 20 41-160 [3.9] 31-17-218 [7.1] 16.4 -3 +11.8 OREGON (3) 46.3 27 44-237 [5.5] 31-21-308 [10.0] 11.8 22.5 23 37-154 [4.1] 39-24-260 [6.6] 18.4 +17 +23.8 FLORIDA ST 40.0 25 30-150 [5.0] 39-25-344 [8.8] 12.3 30.7 24 40-190 [4.7] 33-19-266 [8.0] 14.9 -1 +9.3 OREGON 48.0 26 45-244 [5.4] 29-20-298 [10.2] 11.3 26.8 23 35-160 [4.6] 44-26-279 [6.4] 16.4 +9 +21.2

FLORIDA ST 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 vs. OKLAHOMA ST 45 -18.5 64.5 37-31 W L O 106 3.4 370 9.3 2 161 3.8 203 7.3 29/6/14 THE CITADEL 22 -56.5 63.5 37-12 W L U 210 6.0 284 8.9 0 250 4.5 72 5.1 09/20/14 CLEMSON 53 -10 54 23-17 W L U 13 0.5 305 7.8 2 101 2.5 306 9.3 19/27/14 at NC STATE 43 -17 60 56-41 W L O 166 5.0 365 9.6 4 161 4.4 359 7.2 210/4/14 WAKE FOREST 29 -37 54 43-3 W W U 171 5.2 304 7.4 2 40 1.0 86 3.9 310/11/14 at SYRACUSE 37 -23.5 55.5 38-20 W L O 165 4.6 317 8.8 2 156 5.0 256 7.1 310/18/14 NOTRE DAME 47 -9.5 59 31-27 W L U 50 1.9 273 8.8 1 157 4.5 313 6.0 210/30/14 at LOUISVILLE 52 -3.5 51 42-31 W W O 173 5.8 401 8.4 3 158 4.8 330 8.7 211/8/14 VIRGINIA 46 -21 55 34-20 W L U 115 2.9 261 7.5 3 37 1.2 220 6.3 311/15/14 at MIAMI FL 47 -2 62 30-26 W W U 114 6.0 304 7.2 3 176 4.4 316 9.3 311/22/14 BOSTON COLLEGE 46 -16.5 58 20-17 W L U 110 3.8 281 8.8 1 240 4.7 73 6.6 011/29/14 FLORIDA 53 -6.5 54 24-19 W L U 181 4.4 125 5.2 4 113 3.4 169 5.3 212/6/14 vs. GEORGIA TECH 56 -3.5 63.5 37-35 W L O 179 5.4 309 10.3 0 331 5.6 134 9.6 1OREGON 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 S DAKOTA 17 -53 71.5 62-13 W L O 293 7.7 380 11.9 1 172 4.4 198 5.8 19/6/14 MICHIGAN ST 62 -14 57 46-27 W W O 173 4.3 318 11.4 0 123 3.4 343 7.3 29/13/14 WYOMING 27 -42 63.5 48-14 W L U 263 7.1 293 9.5 0 155 3.8 284 8.6 39/20/14 at WASHINGTON ST 40 -21.5 79.5 38-31 W L U 172 4.1 329 13.2 0 63 3.7 436 6.9 210/2/14 ARIZONA 53 -21.5 81.5 24-31 L L U 144 3.5 302 9.2 2 208 3.8 287 9.3 210/11/14 at UCLA 54 -1.5 73.5 42-30 W W U 258 6.3 210 7.8 0 328 6.1 225 5.9 210/18/14 WASHINGTON 50 -21 64.5 45-20 W W O 218 4.4 336 10.2 0 133 3.7 184 4.8 210/24/14 vs. CALIFORNIA 41 -17 78 59-41 W W O 264 5.7 326 10.9 2 193 5.1 367 6.7 211/1/14 STANFORD 56 -7 56.5 45-16 W W O 267 5.8 258 8.3 1 132 3.4 296 9.0 211/8/14 at UTAH 46 -9.5 61.5 51-27 W W O 269 5.4 239 8.2 1 120 3.4 320 9.7 411/22/14 COLORADO 37 -33 74 44-10 W W U 265 6.5 332 9.2 0 121 4.0 105 3.3 011/29/14 at OREGON ST 41 -21 66.5 47-19 W W U 198 5.0 367 14.7 1 146 4.6 216 4.6 112/5/14 vs. ARIZONA 53 -14.5 72.5 51-13 W W U 301 5.6 316 7.9 0 111 3.2 113 4.3 2



(261) FLORIDA ST [SU:13-0 | ATS:3-10]

Head Coach: Jimbo Fisher • Conference: ACC

(262) OREGON (-9 | 72) [SU:12-1 | ATS:9-4]Head Coach: Mark Helfrich • Conference: Pac-12


Florida St 70.5 72

Oregon -8.5 -9


75

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


75


ROSE BOWL (PASADENA, CA)

• OREGON is 10-1 ATS(L2Y) - Against efficient offenses averaging less than 13.2 yards per point(CS)

• FLORIDA ST is 2-8 ATS(CS) - On grass field• FLORIDA ST is 5-1 UNDER(S2000) - In January 1st Bowl Games

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?261 FLORIDA ST 72 58 24.6 UNDER 30.6 UNDER 33.4 FSU262 OREGON -9 68 -11 38.0 37.0 32.9 UNDER

RECENT FLORIDA ST BOWL GAME LOG RECENT OREGON BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

1/1/10 WEST VIRGINIA (Gator) 33-21 W 3 W 56U 1/1/10 OHIO ST (Rose) 17-26 L -4.5 L 51U12/31/10 SOUTH CAROLINA (Chick-Fil-A Peach)26-17 W 2 W 53.5U 1/10/11 AUBURN (Bcs Championship Game) 19-22 L -1 L 73.5U12/29/11 NOTRE DAME (Champs Sports) 18-14 W -3 W 47.5U 1/2/12 WISCONSIN (Rose) 45-38 W -4 W 74O1/1/13 N ILLINOIS (Orange) 31-10 W -15 W 58U 1/3/13 KANSAS ST (Fiesta) 35-17 W -7.5 W 74U1/6/14 AUBURN (Bcs Championship Game) 34-31 W -12 L 68U 12/30/13 TEXAS (Alamo) 30-7 W -16 W 68U

RECENT FLORIDA ST BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT OREGON BOWL GAME TRENDS* FLORIDA ST is 8-2 SU & 8-1-1 ATS in bowl games since '05 * OREGON is on 3-game SU & ATS bowl winning streak* The L5 FLORIDA ST bowl games all went UNDER the total * Nine of L12 OREGON bowl games went UNDER the total* SEMINOLES are on a 4-0-1 ATS run as bowl game underdogs * OREGON lost L2 bowl games SU & ATS vs ACC foes, both Wake

The Rose Bowl half of the two semi-final clashes is yet another first-time-ever matchup. The Ducks will try to extend their 8-game ATS winning streak. They are on a 3-0 SU/ATS bowl run since losing to Auburn in the 2010 BCS Championship game. The Seminoles (13-0 SU/3-10 ATS) have won six consecutive bowl games, the last four under Jimbo Fisher.

The Rose Bowl has hosted many big time games in its rich history, but the stakes for the 2015 contest are unique, as Pasadena hosts the first ever FBS college football playoff game. The combatants are undefeated Florida State out of the ACC, and one-loss Oregon out of the Pac 12. Even though the Seminoles are unbeaten and the defending national champions, the Ducks are heavy favorites. Pac 12 teams are of course regular participants in the Gran-daddy of the them All, and boast a 5-2 SU & ATS record in their L7 appearances. Oregon is 2-4 all-time but did win its most recent try in 2012 over Wisconsin. Favorites hold a slight edge in recent years, going 5-2 SU & 4-3 ATS since ’08. One interesting trend to watch is how the pointspread moves, as the betting public has lost five straight times. As of presstime, they were siding with Oregon, as the Ducks opened as an 8-point favorite but bumped up to 9 out of the gate.

Paul says: All season people have been harping on Florida State underachieving and winning too many close games. At some point people need to realize the Seminoles are not underachieving, they just don’t have the same talent as last year. Nevertheless, a team with lesser courage and heart (see Oregon most years) would have lost a time or two, yet Florida State enters this conflict on a 29-game winning streak and truly has the heart of a champion. The only way the Noles lose is being knocked out and somebody playing a full 60 minutes against them and Oregon is capable, but the Ducks defense is beatable which keeps Florida State in the game. Oregon wins but just by 3.

RECENT ROSE BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U1/1/10 OREGON (P12) 17 OHIO ST (B10) 26 -4.5 51 OHIO ST (B10) OHIO ST (B10) DOG DOG UNDER1/1/11 TCU (MWC) 21 WISCONSIN (B10) 19 -3.5 54.5 TCU (MWC) WISCONSIN (B10) FAV DOG UNDER1/2/12 OREGON (P12) 45 WISCONSIN (B10) 38 -4 74 OREGON (P12) OREGON (P12) FAV FAV OVER1/1/13 STANFORD (P12) 20 WISCONSIN (B10) 14 -4 46.5 STANFORD (P12) STANFORD (P12) FAV FAV UNDER1/1/14 STANFORD (P12) 20 MICHIGAN ST (B10) 24 -7.5 41.5 MICHIGAN ST (B10) MICHIGAN ST (B10) DOG DOG OVER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Thursday, January 1, 2015 - (261) FLORIDA ST vs. (262) OREGON (-9)Oregon Florida St Florida St* Florida St Oregon Oregon Florida St Florida St

Thursday, January 1, 2015 - (261) FLORIDA ST vs. (262) OREGON - TOTAL (72)OVER UNDER* UNDER UNDER* UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


76




Alabama has won three national championships in the last five years and they are favored to make it four out of six. This is not Nick Saban’s best squad, yet it might be his most tough-minded. At various times the offense has won games and the defense took others, making it a true team. The Crimson Tide is after history and if they play mistake-free football and take away the Ohio State running game, they will be one step closer to realizing their goal. The Buckeyes might have caught a break to be in this position, but is no denying they earned it. After losing at home to Virginia Tech, Ohio State flattened their next 11 opponents by 28.1 PPG. Whether Cardale Jones will be as effective on a much larger stage will be proven, however, Urban Meyer will have sold his team on every person doing their job which can lead to victory.

SUGAR BOWL • 8:30 PM ET (ESPN) – JAN 1, 2015

OHIO ST (5) 45.2 26 45-261 [5.8] 27-17-247 [9.2] 11.2 21.2 19 36-140 [3.9] 32-18-188 [5.8] 15.5 +9 +24.0 ALABAMA (1) 37.1 25 41-208 [5.1] 32-21-280 [8.8] 13.2 16.6 16 32-88 [2.8] 35-19-224 [6.4] 18.8 -1 +20.5 OHIO ST 42.7 22 44-257 [5.8] 21-14-220 [10.4] 11.2 21.0 20 39-153 [3.9] 34-18-186 [5.5] 16.1 +5 +21.7 ALABAMA 26.7 21 41-175 [4.3] 30-18-233 [7.7] 15.3 17.5 17 36-99 [2.7] 35-19-235 [6.7] 19.1 0 +9.2

OHIO ST 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 vs. NAVY 40 -13 54 34-17 W W U 194 4.9 226 15.1 1 370 5.9 20 5.0 19/6/14 VIRGINIA TECH 43 -10 46.5 21-35 L L O 108 2.7 219 7.6 3 121 3.0 199 5.5 39/13/14 KENT ST 25 -31 48.5 66-0 W W O 284 5.4 344 10.1 3 47 2.0 79 2.3 39/27/14 CINCINNATI 47 -17 60.5 50-28 W W O 380 5.8 330 9.2 1 70 3.7 352 10.7 010/4/14 at MARYLAND 42 -6 58 52-24 W W O 269 5.1 264 11.0 0 66 2.8 244 6.1 410/18/14 RUTGERS 38 -20.5 62 56-17 W W O 324 8.1 261 8.4 1 149 3.9 196 6.8 310/25/14 at PENN ST 42 -14 52.5 31-24 W L O 219 3.8 74 3.9 2 16 0.5 224 4.5 211/1/14 ILLINOIS 39 -28.5 62 55-14 W W O 296 6.7 249 7.3 1 106 2.5 137 5.1 411/8/14 at MICHIGAN ST 62 +4 55 49-37 W W O 268 6.5 300 11.5 2 178 5.2 358 8.0 011/15/14 at MINNESOTA 48 -11.5 56 31-24 W L U 289 7.6 200 8.0 3 218 5.0 85 4.3 211/22/14 INDIANA 34 -36.5 66 42-27 W L O 225 5.8 302 8.6 3 281 7.8 114 4.2 111/29/14 MICHIGAN 42 -21 54.5 42-28 W L O 233 6.0 183 7.6 0 121 3.2 251 7.6 212/6/14 vs. WISCONSIN 56 +4.5 57.5 59-0 W W O 301 7.9 257 14.3 0 71 1.9 187 4.3 4ALABAMA 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 vs. WEST VIRGINIA 52 -22 53 33-23 W L O 288 5.9 250 7.6 1 28 1.2 365 8.1 09/6/14 FLA ATLANTIC 26 -41.5 52.5 41-0 W L U 204 6.2 416 11.2 1 57 2.4 88 4.6 19/13/14 SOUTHERN MISS 23 -45.5 56.5 52-12 W L O 333 6.8 214 8.9 1 56 3.1 207 5.6 09/20/14 FLORIDA 53 -14 51 42-21 W W O 196 3.8 449 12.8 4 107 4.0 93 3.3 310/4/14 at OLE MISS 58 -4 53 17-23 L L U 168 3.8 228 7.4 2 72 2.3 251 8.1 110/11/14 at ARKANSAS 57 -8.5 53.5 14-13 W L U 66 2.1 161 7.7 2 89 2.3 246 6.2 310/18/14 TEXAS A&M 50 -11.5 63 59-0 W W U 298 6.6 304 8.7 0 31 1.3 141 4.5 110/25/14 at TENNESSEE 49 -19.5 46.5 34-20 W L O 183 4.5 286 11.9 2 181 4.2 202 5.6 211/8/14 at LSU 56 -6.5 46 20-13 W W U 106 3.7 209 4.5 1 183 3.3 76 2.9 111/15/14 MISSISSIPPI ST 59 -10 55 25-20 W L U 124 3.9 211 6.8 0 138 3.5 290 6.0 311/22/14 W CAROLINA 19 -51 56 48-14 W L O 275 6.1 337 7.8 2 -8 -0.6 221 5.7 011/29/14 AUBURN 60 -10 55.5 55-44 W W O 227 6.7 312 11.6 3 174 3.7 456 10.6 212/6/14 vs. MISSOURI 52 -14.5 49 42-13 W W O 242 4.9 262 9.7 0 41 1.8 272 8.0 1



(263) OHIO ST [SU:12-1 | ATS:8-5]

Head Coach: Urban Meyer • Conference: Big Ten

(264) ALABAMA (-9 | 59) [SU:12-1 | ATS:5-7]Head Coach: Nick Saban • Conference: SEC


Ohio St 56.5 59

Alabama -9 -9


77

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


77


MERCEDES-BENZ SUPERDOME (NEW ORLEANS, LA)

• OHIO ST is 8-2 ATS(L5Y) - As underdog• ALABAMA is 4-8 ATS(L3Y) - Non-conference games• OHIO ST is 10-1 OVER(L3Y) - Against good teams with 80%+ winning pct(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?263 OHIO ST 59 62 30.5 OHST 28.5 OHST 27.4 264 ALABAMA -9 68 -6.5 31.9 30.1 33.0

RECENT OHIO ST BOWL GAME LOG RECENT ALABAMA BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

1/5/09 TEXAS (Fiesta) 21-24 L 9 W 51.5U 1/7/10 TEXAS (Bcs Championship Game) 37-21 W -3.5 W 44.5O1/1/10 OREGON (Rose) 26-17 W 4.5 W 51U 1/1/11 MICHIGAN ST (Capital One) 49-7 W -7.5 W 50.5O1/4/11 ARKANSAS (Sugar) 31-26 W -3 W 57.5U 1/9/12 LSU (Bcs Championship Game) 21-0 W -2.5 W 42U1/2/12 FLORIDA (Gator) 17-24 L 2.5 L 44U 1/7/13 NOTRE DAME (Bcs Championship Game)42-14 W -10 W 39.5O1/3/14 CLEMSON (Orange) 35-40 L -2.5 L 71.5O 1/2/14 OKLAHOMA (Sugar) 31-45 L -17 L 51.5O

RECENT OHIO ST BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT ALABAMA BOWL GAME TRENDS* OHIO ST is 2-5 SU & 3-4 ATS in bowl games after winning prior five * ALABAMA is on 4-1 SU & ATS run in bowl games but lost LY* OHIO ST is 1-8 ATS in L9 bowl games vs SEC foes * Seven of L8 ALABAMA bowl games went OVER the total* BUCKEYES are 6-2 ATS in L8 bowl games as UNDERDOGS * FAVORITES are 6-2 SU & ATS in L8 ALABAMA bowl games

These traditional powerhouses have met three previous times. The Crimson Tide is 3-0 SU: 24-17 in the 1995 Citrus Bowl; 16-10 in the 1986 Kickoff Classic; and 35-6 in the 1978 Sugar Bowl. Nick Saban had a streak of three BCS titles plus a Capital One Bowl victory before losing 45-31 to Oklahoma in last season’s Sugar Bowl. Urban Meyer is 7-2 SU in bowls.

The Sugar Bowl hosts the second of the two playoff semifinal games, as Alabama and Ohio State square off in New Orleans. Alabama was expected to be where it is, but the Buckeyes surprised most experts by leapfrogging two Big 12 teams after their huge upset performance against Wisconsin in the Big Ten title game. The Tide are no strangers to the Sugar Bowl, as they have lost this game twice as heavy favorites in the last six years. In fact, the SEC has not represented itself well at all in this game, losing three straight, the last two coming as favorites of two touchdowns or more. Alabama is a heavy favorite once again. Ohio State was last year in 2011 and eeked out a 5-point win over Arkansas. Should the Buckeyes cover this contest, there is a good chance the game sails OVER the total as well, as dog ATS wins have meant four straight OVER’s.

Paul says: I truly admire what Ohio State did in playing the ‘perfect’ game in the Big Ten championship against Wisconsin with third-stringer Cardale Jones. But Wisconsin is not Alabama and Gary Anderson is not Nick Saban and the joyride Jones had from the opening kickoff will be much more difficult against the Crimson Tide. Alabama can certainly contain the Buckeyes running game and force Jones to throw on third and long. While I was shocked Lane Kiffin was brought in as offensive-coordinator, Saban has made it work, blending smash-mouth and finesse seamlessly, which will give Ohio State fits. This might have been interesting if J.T. Barrett was playing, but he’s not and the Tide rolls by 14.

RECENT SUGAR BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U1/1/10 FLORIDA (SEC) 51 CINCINNATI (BEAST) 24 -12 59 FLORIDA (SEC) FLORIDA (SEC) FAV FAV OVER1/4/11 OHIO ST (B10) 31 ARKANSAS (SEC) 26 -3 57.5 OHIO ST (B10) OHIO ST (B10) FAV FAV UNDER1/3/12 MICHIGAN (B10) 23 VIRGINIA TECH (ACC) 20 -3 52 MICHIGAN (B10) PUSH (PUSH) FAV PUSH UNDER1/2/13 FLORIDA (SEC) 23 LOUISVILLE (BEAST) 33 -14 47.5 LOUISVILLE (BEAST) LOUISVILLE (BEAST) DOG DOG OVER1/2/14 ALABAMA (SEC) 31 OKLAHOMA (B12) 45 -17 51.5 OKLAHOMA (B12) OKLAHOMA (B12) DOG DOG OVER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Thursday, January 1, 2015 - (263) OHIO ST vs. (264) ALABAMA (-9)Ohio St* Alabama* Alabama* Ohio St Ohio St Ohio St Ohio St Ohio St

Thursday, January 1, 2015 - (263) OHIO ST vs. (264) ALABAMA - TOTAL (59)UNDER UNDER OVER UNDER UNDER OVER OVER UNDER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


78




In a surprise move, Houston fired coach Tony Levine which has to leave the players wondering. The Cougars were 7-5 and four of those losses were by eight or less points, which suggested Houston was not far away in the AAC. The Cougs defense ranked among the top 20 in the FBS in PPG allowed (19.5), yards per play allowed (4.79) and total yards allowed (334.6) and anyone who saw QB Greg Ward Jr. play understands his big play ability. Houston will be at a size disadvantage in this matchup but they compensate with tremendous speed and quickness. There is a fine line between 7-6 and 6-7 and Pittsburgh put together two clutch victories to end the season become bowl eligible. The Panthers have a lot of youth and sophomore stud RB James Conner was the ACC P.O.Y. What team imposes their will is set to win this ballgame.

ARMED FORCES BOWL • 12:00 PM ET (ESPN) – JAN 2, 2014

PITTSBURGH 31.7 23 47-251 [5.3] 23-14-183 [8.1] 13.7 25.6 19 35-156 [4.4] 29-15-193 [6.7] 13.6 -5 +6.1 HOUSTON 29.3 22 38-183 [4.8] 35-21-225 [6.4] 13.9 19.5 18 38-136 [3.5] 31-18-198 [6.3] 17.1 +8 +9.8 PITTSBURGH 32.2 21 48-254 [5.3] 19-11-152 [7.8] 12.6 26.4 20 36-155 [4.3] 33-16-213 [6.4] 13.9 -2 +5.8 HOUSTON 29.2 21 37-186 [5.0] 34-21-217 [6.3] 13.8 21.4 22 41-151 [3.7] 33-20-216 [6.6] 17.1 +5 +7.8

PITTSBURGH 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 DELAWARE 19 -24 59.5 62-0 W W O 409 7.3 92 6.6 1 26 0.9 31 1.9 39/5/14 at BOSTON COLLEGE 46 -5.5 50 30-20 W W U 302 6.0 111 5.6 1 142 4.2 134 4.8 29/13/14 at FLA INTERNATIONAL 27 -24.5 47 42-25 W L O 321 5.9 101 5.3 3 57 1.7 236 6.7 19/20/14 IOWA 47 -6.5 46.5 20-24 L L U 185 4.4 250 8.3 1 133 3.8 178 9.9 19/27/14 AKRON 29 -20.5 51 10-21 L L U 129 3.2 220 6.5 2 169 4.7 213 6.1 110/4/14 at VIRGINIA 46 +5.5 46 19-24 L W U 116 3.3 195 6.5 1 225 5.2 121 7.1 110/16/14 VIRGINIA TECH 43 +1 45.5 21-16 W W U 210 4.9 121 6.7 2 26 1.2 265 5.9 110/25/14 GEORGIA TECH 56 -4 56.5 28-56 L L O 198 6.4 328 9.4 6 465 7.3 147 12.3 111/1/14 DUKE 44 -3.5 52.5 48-51 L L O 358 5.5 236 9.8 0 172 6.4 266 8.6 011/15/14 at NORTH CAROLINA 43 +2.5 67 35-40 L L O 305 5.8 218 13.6 1 226 5.3 276 6.9 011/22/14 SYRACUSE 37 -7 52 30-7 W W U 256 4.9 189 9.5 1 106 3.7 149 6.0 311/29/14 at MIAMI FL 47 +11 55.5 35-23 W W O 226 4.8 134 11.2 0 125 4.5 296 6.6 0HOUSTON 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/29/14 TX-SAN ANTONIO 27 -8.5 56.5 7-27 L L U -26 -1.1 234 4.7 6 142 2.8 121 5.0 19/6/14 GRAMBLING 8 -49.5 66 47-0 W L U 275 6.9 202 7.8 2 63 1.6 175 6.5 69/11/14 at BYU 44 +17 63 25-33 L W U 10 0.8 315 5.9 0 323 5.2 200 5.9 39/20/14 UNLV 22 -20 63.5 47-14 W W U 399 7.7 135 4.7 2 170 4.4 146 3.7 310/2/14 UCF 45 -2.5 48.5 12-17 L L U 117 3.5 214 5.0 3 127 3.4 101 5.6 110/11/14 at MEMPHIS 47 +7 48 28-24 W W O 186 4.3 168 6.7 3 125 3.0 243 6.6 510/17/14 TEMPLE 37 -9 52 31-10 W W U 171 3.5 268 8.1 0 98 4.9 259 8.9 411/1/14 at SOUTH FLORIDA 29 -8 44.5 27-3 W W U 217 4.6 89 4.7 0 76 2.6 146 5.6 111/8/14 TULANE 29 -17 46 24-31 L L O 90 2.8 342 7.0 4 124 3.4 237 6.8 211/22/14 TULSA 27 -19.5 56.5 38-28 W L O 246 5.9 225 10.2 0 158 4.5 258 6.3 311/28/14 at SMU 18 -21 51 35-9 W W U 282 5.9 151 5.2 1 78 2.5 145 5.2 112/6/14 at CINCINNATI 47 +7 57 31-38 L T O 234 6.7 360 8.0 1 152 3.5 348 9.2 0



(265) PITTSBURGH (-3 | 53.5) [SU:6-6 | ATS:6-6]

Head Coach: Paul Chryst • Conference: AAC

(266) HOUSTON [SU:7-5 | ATS:6-5-1]Head Coach: Travis Bush • Conference: The American


Pittsburgh -3 -3

Houston -53 53.5

*Chryst was rumored to be heading to Wisconsin as of press time and might not be coaching Pittsburgh in bowl game


79

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


79


AMON CARTER STADIUM (FORT WORTH, TX)

• HOUSTON is 8-1-1 ATS(L2Y) - Against decent rushing teams averaging more than 4.4 yards per carry(CS)

• PITTSBURGH is 3-7 ATS(L2Y) - as favorite of 7 or less points• PITTSBURGH is 8-2 UNDER(L2Y) - Against lesser passing teams averaging less than 6.5 yards per

attempt(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?265 PITTSBURGH -3 45 30.8 28.3 26.5 266 HOUSTON 53.5 41 3.8 25.7 24.0 23.6

RECENT PITTSBURGH BOWL GAME LOG RECENT HOUSTON BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/26/09 NORTH CAROLINA (Belk) 19-17 W -1 W 46U 12/28/07 TCU (Texas) 13-20 L 6.5 L 57U1/8/11 KENTUCKY (Birmingham) 27-10 W -4.5 W 52U 12/31/08 AIR FORCE (Armed Forces) 34-28 W -5.5 W 65U1/7/12 SMU (Birmingham) 6-28 L -4 L 47.5U 12/31/09 AIR FORCE (Armed Forces) 20-47 L -4.5 L 65.5O1/5/13 OLE MISS (Birmingham) 17-38 L 4 L 54O 1/2/12 PENN ST (Heart Of Dallas) 30-14 W -6.5 W 56U12/26/13 BOWLING GREEN (Little Caesars) 30-27 W 6.5 W 50O 1/4/14 VANDERBILT (Birmingham) 24-41 L 1.5 L 53O

RECENT PITTSBURGH BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT HOUSTON BOWL GAME TRENDS* FAVORITES are 6-2 SU & ATS in L8 PITTSBURGH bowl games * FAVORITES are on a 6-1 SU & ATS run in HOUSTON bowl games* PITT went OVER in L2 bowl games after going UNDER in prior six * HOUSTON has won just two of L7 bowl games (4-5 ATS)* PANTHERS have scored just 15.3 PPG in L8 bowl games * HOUSTON is 1-4 SU & 2-3 ATS in L5 bowl games vs power conferences

The Cougars get home-state advantage for the Military Bowl in TCU’s Amon G. Carter Stadium. These teams played a home-and-home series in 1996-97, and the Panthers scored 35 points in each game, losing the first 42-35, and winning the second 35-24. Houston is 1-6 and 2-5 ATS in bowls since 2003. These teams have lost the last three BBVA Compass Bowls.

In six of the L7 Armed Forces Bowl games, one of the participants was a military academy. The lone anomaly was in 2011 when BYU beat Tulsa. This year’s matchup again features no military organization as Pittsburgh takes on Houston. Clearly the Cougars will enjoy a regional advantage, however, teams from state of Texas are just 3-3 ATS in this game historically, including Houston, who is 1-2 SU & ATS in three prior appearances. The last four games have gone UNDER the total, each by at least 14 points. Bettors have had a good feel for this contest, hitting the right side in five of the L6 years. As of presstime, they were leaning to Pittsburgh, but the opening line moved only slightly, with the Panthers going from 2.5-point favorites to 3-point chalk.

Steve Makinen says: Paul Chryst has been the offensive mastermind at Pittsburgh for the last three seasons. While the Panthers haven’t exactly lit the world on fire offensively, the players bought into the system and the unit seemed to be finally coming around down the stretch. At Houston, HC Tony Levine was just fired after three years of juggling offensive coordinators but unable to capture the offensive magic developed under previous coach Kevin Sumlin. It’s a bit of a shame too, as Levine’s defense had actually fared quite well this season. So, I ask you, do you see any signs pointing to a shootout in this game? Don’t cloud yourself with visions of Houston past. This is a different type of team altogether, and will try to win this game defensively. In a bowl game with a history of going UNDER easily, I look for another.

RECENT ARMED FORCES BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/31/09 HOUSTON (CUSA) 20 AIR FORCE (MWC) 47 -4.5 65.5 AIR FORCE (MWC) AIR FORCE (MWC) DOG DOG OVER12/30/10 SMU (CUSA) 14 ARMY (IND) 16 -7 50.5 ARMY (IND) ARMY (IND) DOG DOG UNDER12/30/11 TULSA (CUSA) 21 BYU (IND) 24 -2.5 59.5 BYU (IND) BYU (IND) DOG DOG UNDER12/29/12 RICE (CUSA) 33 AIR FORCE (MWC) 14 -1 61 RICE (CUSA) RICE (CUSA) FAV FAV UNDER12/30/13 NAVY (IND) 24 MIDDLE TENN ST (CUSA) 6 -7 57 NAVY (IND) NAVY (IND) FAV FAV UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Friday, January 2, 2015 - (265) PITTSBURGH vs. (266) HOUSTON (+3)Pittsburgh Pittsburgh Houston Pittsburgh Pittsburgh Pittsburgh Houston Pittsburgh

Friday, January 2, 2015 - (265) PITTSBURGH vs. (266) HOUSTON - TOTAL (53.5)OVER OVER OVER UNDER* UNDER OVER UNDER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


80




Aside from Wisconsin back in August, Iowa should have been a prime contender in the Big Ten West. Instead, the Hawkeyes were plagued by inconsistencies and the natives are questioning the wisdom of what Kirk Ferentz is any longer bringing to the table with the program not going up or down. One good reason to watch this game from the Iowa perspective is OT Brandon Scherff, who will bowl over his counterpart across the line of scrimmage. Tennessee has not been bowling since 2010, thus Butch Jones will have plenty of Volunteers who will be excited to play well in a postseason contest. The Vols are going through the rebuilding process and Jones is upgrading the talent annually and having this bowl experience will do wonders for everyone associated. For Tennessee, watch DE Derek Barnett, who as a freshman was one the top pass-rushers in the country.

TAXSLAYER BOWL • 3:20 PM ET (ESPN) – JAN 2, 2015

IOWA 28.2 21 40-156 [3.9] 34-21-242 [7.2] 14.1 24.0 16 37-159 [4.3] 28-14-176 [6.4] 14.0 -5 +4.2 TENNESSEE 27.6 21 39-135 [3.4] 36-22-228 [6.3] 13.2 23.9 18 40-162 [4.1] 29-15-198 [6.9] 15.1 +1 +3.7 IOWA 24.6 19 40-162 [4.0] 32-18-229 [7.1] 15.9 26.6 18 40-172 [4.3] 28-15-163 [5.8] 12.6 -4 -2.0 TENNESSEE 22.8 21 39-149 [3.8] 36-20-214 [5.9] 15.9 32.4 22 42-197 [4.7] 31-17-237 [7.7] 13.4 -4 -9.6

IOWA 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 N IOWA 38 -17.5 40.5 31-23 W L O 151 4.2 250 6.1 1 25 1.0 380 10.3 29/6/14 BALL ST 30 -18 52 17-13 W L U 113 3.9 342 6.2 2 90 2.5 129 4.3 19/13/14 IOWA ST 32 -13 49 17-20 L L U 129 2.9 146 6.1 2 82 3.2 255 6.9 19/20/14 at PITTSBURGH 45 +6.5 46.5 24-20 W W U 133 3.8 178 9.9 1 185 4.4 250 8.3 19/27/14 at PURDUE 33 -8.5 47 24-10 W W U 175 3.4 245 6.6 1 84 2.8 72 2.3 210/11/14 INDIANA 34 -3 54 45-29 W W O 207 4.7 219 6.8 0 316 8.1 116 5.5 310/18/14 at MARYLAND 42 +4 45.5 31-38 L L O 116 3.7 317 5.7 3 212 4.6 206 6.2 211/1/14 NORTHWESTERN 40 -3 44 48-7 W W O 221 4.8 262 10.5 1 105 2.4 75 3.1 111/8/14 at MINNESOTA 48 -1.5 43 14-51 L L O 84 2.8 121 4.7 3 291 4.9 138 9.9 011/15/14 at ILLINOIS 39 -5.5 54 30-14 W W U 304 5.5 283 11.8 1 88 3.5 147 4.7 011/22/14 WISCONSIN 56 +9.5 49.5 24-26 L W O 101 3.6 311 10.4 1 266 6.3 139 9.9 011/28/14 NEBRASKA 50 -1 52.5 34-37 L L O 142 2.8 230 6.1 4 161 5.2 202 7.2 2TENNESSEE 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/31/14 UTAH ST 42 -3 51 38-7 W W U 110 2.8 273 6.8 0 100 4.2 144 4.1 39/6/14 ARKANSAS ST 34 -16 58.5 34-19 W L U 168 3.7 247 6.5 1 141 3.4 190 5.3 19/13/14 at OKLAHOMA 56 +21 58 10-34 L L U 112 3.4 201 4.6 3 146 4.3 308 9.3 29/27/14 at GEORGIA 61 +19.5 57 32-35 L W O 117 3.4 284 6.5 2 289 5.5 147 5.9 210/4/14 FLORIDA 53 -1 52 9-10 L L U 28 1.0 205 5.3 3 156 3.3 76 2.8 310/11/14 CHATTANOOGA 36 -25 48.5 45-10 W W O 123 2.9 217 7.5 1 105 2.8 96 5.6 310/18/14 at OLE MISS 58 +15 45.5 3-34 L L U 0 0.0 191 5.6 4 180 3.8 203 6.5 010/25/14 ALABAMA 68 +19.5 46.5 20-34 L W O 181 4.2 202 5.6 2 183 4.5 286 11.9 211/1/14 at SOUTH CAROLINA 50 +6 55 45-42 W W O 344 6.3 301 7.5 1 248 6.4 377 11.1 111/15/14 KENTUCKY 43 -11 53 50-16 W W O 214 4.2 297 10.2 0 94 2.8 168 5.8 211/22/14 MISSOURI 52 -5.5 48.5 21-29 L L O 53 1.8 226 5.9 2 180 4.0 230 9.2 011/29/14 at VANDERBILT 30 -15 50 24-17 W L U 170 3.8 92 4.6 2 123 3.4 149 5.0 3



(267) IOWA [SU:7-5 | ATS:6-6]

Head Coach: Kirk Ferentz • Conference: Big Ten

(268) TENNESSEE (-4 | 51) [SU:6-6 | ATS:6-6]Head Coach: Butch Jones • Conference: SEC


Iowa 52.5 51

Tennessee -3.5 -4


81

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


81


EVERBANK FIELD (JACKSONVILLE, FL)

• IOWA is 8-3 ATS(S2000) - In Bowl Games• TENNESSEE is 5-23 ATS(L5Y) - Against decent passing defenses yielding less than 6.5 yards per

attempt(CS)• IOWA is 8-2 UNDER(L5Y) - Against inefficient defenses allowing less than 15.3 yards per point(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?267 IOWA 51 47 22.1 26.6 19.9 UNDER268 TENNESSEE -4 49 -1.5 29.4 26.7 22.1

RECENT IOWA BOWL GAME LOG RECENT TENNESSEE BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

1/1/09 SOUTH CAROLINA (Outback) 31-10 W -3.5 W 42U 1/1/05 TEXAS A&M (Cotton) 38-7 W 4.5 W 55.5U1/5/10 GEORGIA TECH (Orange) 24-14 W 6 W 51U 1/1/07 PENN ST (Outback) 10-20 L -4 L 41.5U12/28/10 MISSOURI (Insight) 27-24 W 3 W 46O 1/1/08 WISCONSIN (Outback) 21-17 W -2.5 W 56.5U12/30/11 OKLAHOMA (Insight) 14-31 L 13.5 L 58U 12/31/09 VIRGINIA TECH (Chick-Fil-A Peach) 14-37 L 5 L 48O1/1/14 LSU (Outback) 14-21 L 7.5 W 48U 12/30/10 NORTH CAROLINA (Music City) 27-30 L -1 L 50O

RECENT IOWA BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT TENNESSEE BOWL GAME TRENDS* IOWA is 10-4 ATS in bowl games since '95 * TENNESSEE hasn't won a bowl game since 2008* IOWA is on a 4-1 ATS run in bowl games vs SEC foes * VOLUNTEERS have gone just 2-8 SU & ATS in L10 bowl games* UNDERDOGS have covered 11 of L14 IOWA bowl games * OUTRIGHT winner is 18-0 ATS in TENNESSEE bowl games since '93

These TaxSlayer Gator Bowl participants last met in the 1980s. Tennessee won the 1987 Kickoff Classic, 24-23, while Iowa took the 1982 Peach Bowl, 28-22. Kirk Ferentz has lost his last two bowls SU, but is 6-5 SU overall. This is Butch Jones’ first bowl at UT. His Cincinnati Bearcats won the 2011 Liberty Bowl, and his CMU Chippewas lost consecutive Motor City Bowls (2007-08.)

The prior-named Gator Bowl game steps out of its normal spot on New Year’s Day and welcomes Iowa and Tennessee for a January 2nd duel. Now known as the TaxSlayer Bowl, this series in Jacksonville has for many years been a favorite dominated bowl series, as the chalk is on a 14-2 SU & 12-4 ATS surge. However, Nebraska did win and cover last year as a 9.5-point dog. If you’re doing any type of simulation for this game, consider that the last six teams to score more than 21 points in this contest have all covered the pointspread. UNDER the total is 5-1 in the L5 seasons.

Consensus says: Even though Iowa boasts the better record, and a coach that has done well in getting his teams prepared for bowl games, our consensus in the TaxSlayer Bowl is siding with Tennessee. The reasons we got from our human experts included things like SEC vs. Big Ten and early line movement towards the Volunteers. In terms of the total, the tally was four UNDER’s, three OVER’s. When asked to give reasons why three of our human experts favored the UNDER. The reasons given there were pace, with both teams at or below the national averages for plays per game, strong scoring defenses, and lack of consistent production for both teams at the quarterback position.

RECENT TAXSLAYER BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U1/1/10 WEST VIRGINIA (BEAST) 21 FLORIDA ST (ACC) 33 -3 56 FLORIDA ST (ACC) FLORIDA ST (ACC) DOG DOG UNDER1/1/11 MISSISSIPPI ST (SEC) 52 MICHIGAN (B10) 14 -3 61.5 MISSISSIPPI ST (SEC) MISSISSIPPI ST (SEC) FAV FAV OVER1/2/12 FLORIDA (SEC) 24 OHIO ST (B10) 17 -2.5 44 FLORIDA (SEC) FLORIDA (SEC) FAV FAV UNDER1/1/13 NORTHWESTERN (B10) 34 MISSISSIPPI ST (SEC) 20 -2 54.5 NORTHWESTERN (B10) NORTHWESTERN (B10) FAV FAV UNDER1/1/14 GEORGIA (SEC) 19 NEBRASKA (B10) 24 -9.5 61 NEBRASKA (B10) NEBRASKA (B10) DOG DOG UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Friday, January 2, 2015 - (267) IOWA vs. (268) TENNESSEE (-4)Iowa Tennessee Tennessee Tennessee Iowa Tennessee Iowa Tennessee

Friday, January 2, 2015 - (267) IOWA vs. (268) TENNESSEE - TOTAL (51)UNDER UNDER UNDER OVER OVER OVER UNDER UNDER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


82




As it turns out, neither UCLA nor Kansas State were quite good enough to knock off the elite in their conferences. The Bruins 4-8 ATS mark told a tale of a team that was parts overrated, rather soft and had more holes than most realized. Quarterback Brett Hundley did not enjoy the breakout campaign many envisioned, but he lacked all necessary weapons to succeed. Kansas State was good enough to be 9-3 (8-4 ATS) but lacked those superior athletes that could put them over the top. This game is worth watching to see K-State QB Jale Waters chucking the pigskin to Tyler Luckett, now the school’s all-time pass catcher. Keys include how UCLA’s 86th ranked pass defense holds up and if the Wildcats can contain Hundley from running. Important contest for each team not wanting to send their senior classes out with consecutive losses.

ALAMO BOWL • 6:45 PM ET (ESPN) – JAN 2, 2015

UCLA (14) 32.9 24 43-199 [4.6] 34-24-268 [7.8] 14.2 27.5 22 39-158 [4.0] 37-23-243 [6.5] 14.6 -1 +5.4 KANSAS ST (11) 35.8 22 37-143 [3.9] 30-20-283 [9.3] 11.9 21.8 20 33-125 [3.7] 35-22-237 [6.8] 16.6 +9 +14.0 UCLA 38.3 23 41-213 [5.2] 35-25-276 [7.9] 12.8 27.5 24 38-147 [3.9] 43-27-280 [6.5] 15.5 +4 +10.8 KANSAS ST 27.2 20 32-106 [3.3] 31-19-308 [10.1] 15.2 31.4 28 40-186 [4.6] 38-27-298 [7.8] 15.4 +4 -4.2

UCLA 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 at VIRGINIA 46 -18.5 50 28-20 W L U 116 3.0 242 7.1 2 120 3.1 266 5.9 39/6/14 MEMPHIS 47 -22 57 42-35 W L O 144 3.5 396 9.0 1 164 4.2 305 7.3 09/13/14 vs. TEXAS 49 -8 49.5 20-17 W L U 217 4.6 226 6.6 1 126 4.2 196 5.8 09/25/14 at ARIZONA ST 54 -3.5 64.5 62-27 W W O 225 6.4 355 15.4 0 138 3.8 488 7.1 410/4/14 UTAH 46 -13 63.5 28-30 L L U 137 2.7 269 12.2 1 242 4.4 100 5.6 010/11/14 OREGON 68 +1.5 73.5 30-42 L L U 328 6.1 225 5.9 2 258 6.3 210 7.8 010/18/14 at CALIFORNIA 41 -6.5 72.5 36-34 W L U 237 5.0 330 7.9 3 56 1.8 310 7.4 110/25/14 at COLORADO 37 -14.5 65.5 40-37 W L O 309 8.4 200 5.1 1 233 5.2 267 5.8 211/1/14 ARIZONA 53 -6.5 70.5 17-7 W W U 271 4.6 189 7.3 1 80 2.6 175 3.6 111/8/14 at WASHINGTON 50 -6 53 44-30 W W O 174 4.4 302 8.2 0 211 4.4 155 6.5 111/22/14 USC 55 -3.5 62 38-20 W W U 135 3.1 326 10.5 2 62 1.9 214 6.3 211/28/14 STANFORD 56 -6.5 48.5 10-31 L L U 100 3.8 162 4.0 1 202 4.5 234 12.3 0KANSAS ST 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 STEPH F AUSTIN 21 -41.5 70.5 55-16 W L O 240 4.7 238 7.9 1 69 3.3 225 5.8 19/6/14 at IOWA ST 32 -12 54.5 32-28 W L O 232 5.7 239 8.2 0 105 2.8 214 6.5 19/18/14 AUBURN 60 +7 64.5 14-20 L W U 40 1.3 245 6.1 3 128 2.8 231 7.5 19/27/14 UTEP 29 -27.5 53.5 58-28 W W O 188 5.1 263 13.8 1 59 1.9 201 7.2 010/4/14 TEXAS TECH 42 -13.5 65.5 45-13 W W U 245 4.9 290 9.4 1 46 3.3 301 6.0 410/18/14 at OKLAHOMA 56 +7 54 31-30 W W O 160 5.0 225 9.8 0 198 4.7 335 9.3 210/25/14 TEXAS 49 -9.5 47 23-0 W W U 143 3.3 224 7.5 0 90 3.3 106 4.2 111/1/14 OKLAHOMA ST 45 -13 53 48-14 W W O 134 4.1 287 8.7 1 113 2.8 148 6.4 311/8/14 at TCU 66 +6.5 59 20-41 L L O 34 1.8 376 9.4 1 334 7.0 219 6.4 011/20/14 at WEST VIRGINIA 52 +2.5 58.5 26-20 W W U 1 0.0 400 11.8 2 123 3.3 310 6.5 411/29/14 KANSAS 34 -26.5 51.5 51-13 W W O 194 5.0 311 10.4 0 58 2.6 139 5.1 212/6/14 at BAYLOR 63 +7 71 27-38 L L U 103 2.6 300 11.1 1 172 4.6 412 10.0 1



(269) UCLA [SU:9-3 | ATS:4-8]

Head Coach: Jim L. Mora • Conference: Pac-12

(270) KANSAS ST (-1.5 | 59.5) [SU:9-3 | ATS:8-4]Head Coach: Bill Snyder • Conference: Big 12


UCLA 59 59.5

Kansas St -3.5 -1.5


83

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


83


ALAMO DOME (SAN ANTONIO, TX)

• KANSAS ST is 15-4-1 ATS(L3Y) - Against good teams with 60%+ winning pct(CS)• UCLA is 4-8 ATS(CS) - All Games• UCLA is 8-2 UNDER(L3Y) - Against decent offensive teams averaging more than 5.7 yards per

play(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?269 UCLA 59.5 54 25.4 UNDER 29.8 33.8 OVER270 KANSAS ST -1.5 57 -3.5 29.6 28.5 33.7

RECENT UCLA BOWL GAME LOG RECENT KANSAS ST BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/22/07 BYU (Las Vegas) 16-17 L 6 W 47U 12/28/06 RUTGERS (Texas) 10-37 L 9 L 44.5O12/29/09 TEMPLE (Military) 30-21 W -4.5 W 44O 12/30/10 SYRACUSE (Pinstripe) 34-36 L 0 L 48.5O12/31/11 ILLINOIS (San Francisco) 14-20 L 3 L 45U 1/6/12 ARKANSAS (Cotton) 16-29 L 9 L 65U12/27/12 BAYLOR (Holiday) 26-49 L -3 L 81U 1/3/13 OREGON (Fiesta) 17-35 L 7.5 L 74U12/31/13 VIRGINIA TECH (Sun) 42-12 W -7 W 45.5O 12/28/13 MICHIGAN (Buffalo Wild Wings) 31-14 W -7 W 52.5U

RECENT UCLA BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT KANSAS ST BOWL GAME TRENDS* FAVORITES are 3-1 SU & ATS in UCLA's L4 bowl games * KANSAS ST's bowl win LY snapped 5-game bowl losing streak* UCLA is 0-3 SU but 2-1 ATS in L3 bowl games as UNDERDOG * WILDCATS are just 1-7 ATS in L8 bowl games* UCLA is playing in its first indoor bowl game * FAVORITES are 4-0 SU & ATS in KSU bowl games since '06

A 2009-10 home-and-home ended with a 1-1 SU/ATS split: K-State 31-22 as 1-point home favorites; UCLA 23-9 as 11.5-point home favorites. Bill Snyder is 7-8 SU in bowls, and lost four consecutive before a SU/ATS win over Michigan last year. You’re never quite sure which Bruins will show up: 41-12 over Virginia Tech (2013 Sun Bowl); 26-49 loss to Baylor (2012 Holiday Bowl).

The 2014 Alamo Bowl game has also been pushed back a few days from its usual December scheduling, but regardless of when it is played, the UCLA-Kansas State matchup will be one of the most anticipated. is one of the most anticipated non-BCS bowl matchups, as Texas and Oregon collide in San Antonio. The Big 12 has been a fixture in this game since ’94, but only in the last four seasons did they start going up against Pac 12 foes. Prior to that it was a Big 12-Big Ten matchup. The Pac 12 snapped a 3-game SU & ATS losing streak in this series last year when Oregon handled Texas easily, 30-7. That game marked the seventh time in eight tries that the favored team triumphed (5-3 ATS). The Wildcats have played in this contest once, losing to Purdue 37-34 in ’98. UCLA is making its first bowl appearance in San Antonio.

Paul says: I’m going to bet the situation and the coach in this bowler. For all UCLA went through this season, they finally were at the point they could advance to the Pac-12 championship and what do they do at home, get hammered by Stanford. I cannot imagine the Bruins are go to be thrilled about San Antonio and if you have followed Jim Mora’s coaching career, UCLA played virtually like all the teams he’s coached. Kansas State was not expected to win the Big 12 but still managed to have a quality campaign at 9-3, as Bill Snyder extracts the most from his players. I expect the Wildcats to be better prepared and K-State is 7-0 ATS versus teams with a 60 to 75 percent win percentage and are victorious by 12.

RECENT ALAMO BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U1/2/10 TEXAS TECH (B12) 41 MICHIGAN ST (B10) 31 -9.5 60 TEXAS TECH (B12) TEXAS TECH (B12) FAV FAV OVER12/29/10 OKLAHOMA ST (B12) 36 ARIZONA (P12) 10 -4.5 68.5 OKLAHOMA ST (B12) OKLAHOMA ST (B12) FAV FAV UNDER12/29/11 BAYLOR (B12) 67 WASHINGTON (P12) 56 -8 79 BAYLOR (B12) BAYLOR (B12) FAV FAV OVER12/29/12 OREGON ST (P12) 27 TEXAS (B12) 31 -3 56 TEXAS (B12) TEXAS (B12) DOG DOG OVER12/30/13 OREGON (P12) 30 TEXAS (B12) 7 -16 68 OREGON (P12) OREGON (P12) FAV FAV UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Friday, January 2, 2015 - (269) UCLA vs. (270) KANSAS ST (-1.5)Kansas St* Kansas St Kansas St* Kansas St* Kansas St Kansas St UCLA Kansas St

Friday, January 2, 2015 - (269) UCLA vs. (270) KANSAS ST - TOTAL (59.5)OVER OVER UNDER OVER UNDER UNDER OVER OVER



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


84




CACTUS BOWL • 10:15 PM ET (ESPN) – JAN 2, 2015

OKLAHOMA ST 27.4 19 38-135 [3.6] 31-17-236 [7.6] 13.5 32.0 22 41-167 [4.1] 34-21-269 [7.8] 13.6 -8 -4.6 WASHINGTON 30.8 20 45-195 [4.4] 28-18-195 [7.0] 12.7 24.4 23 37-122 [3.3] 39-25-284 [7.2] 16.6 +12 +6.4 OKLAHOMA ST 24.5 16 38-124 [3.3] 28-14-200 [7.2] 13.2 38.5 23 44-202 [4.6] 33-20-290 [8.8] 12.8 -4 -14.0WASHINGTON 27.2 20 43-181 [4.2] 30-19-222 [7.3] 14.8 21.8 24 39-139 [3.6] 45-27-293 [6.6] 19.8 +4 +5.4

OKLAHOMA ST 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 vs. FLORIDA ST 58 +18.5 64.5 31-37 L W O 161 3.8 203 7.3 2 106 3.4 370 9.3 29/6/14 MISSOURI ST 24 -33 61.5 40-23 W L O 206 5.9 274 7.8 0 155 3.8 219 9.1 09/13/14 TX-SAN ANTONIO 27 -12 55 43-13 W W O 162 3.3 315 10.5 0 73 2.1 133 4.6 19/25/14 TEXAS TECH 42 -14.5 70 45-35 W L O 158 3.8 370 11.9 2 112 3.6 394 6.6 310/4/14 IOWA ST 32 -16.5 63 37-20 W W U 129 3.1 271 6.6 2 122 3.7 200 5.1 010/11/14 at KANSAS 34 -19 49.5 27-20 W L U 114 3.1 161 5.2 2 91 2.2 288 7.8 110/18/14 at TCU 66 +10 62.5 9-42 L L U 126 3.2 132 5.3 2 261 6.5 415 9.9 110/25/14 WEST VIRGINIA 52 +3 66.5 10-34 L L U 194 5.0 242 5.9 2 210 4.8 238 7.9 011/1/14 at KANSAS ST 57 +13 53 14-48 L L O 113 2.8 148 6.4 3 134 4.1 287 8.7 111/15/14 TEXAS 49 +1.5 47 7-28 L L U 34 1.5 158 5.4 2 125 2.9 305 9.2 011/22/14 at BAYLOR 63 +32.5 68 28-49 L W O 116 2.7 281 11.2 2 317 5.5 262 9.0 212/6/14 at OKLAHOMA 56 +21 58.5 38-35 W W O 112 4.3 273 7.8 1 304 4.8 120 7.1 1WASHINGTON 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 at HAWAII 30 -17 56 17-16 W L U 174 3.6 162 6.2 0 217 4.0 207 4.8 09/6/14 E WASHINGTON 38 -17 63 59-52 W L O 356 6.2 180 7.5 0 98 2.7 475 10.3 29/13/14 ILLINOIS 39 -13 64 44-19 W W U 245 4.2 219 10.0 1 72 2.8 279 9.0 39/20/14 GEORGIA ST 13 -34.5 69 45-14 W L U 182 4.4 154 5.7 0 68 1.7 205 6.0 49/27/14 STANFORD 56 +7.5 49 13-20 L W U 81 2.1 98 3.3 0 186 4.7 178 6.8 310/11/14 at CALIFORNIA 41 +3 67 31-7 W W U 111 2.9 273 9.4 0 64 1.9 304 6.0 310/18/14 at OREGON 68 +21 64.5 20-45 L L O 133 3.7 184 4.8 2 218 4.4 336 10.2 010/25/14 ARIZONA ST 54 +3.5 60.5 10-24 L L U 151 3.3 139 5.3 3 105 2.4 180 7.2 111/1/14 at COLORADO 37 -2.5 54 38-23 W W O 236 5.9 206 10.8 3 181 4.9 314 6.0 411/8/14 UCLA 54 +6 53 30-44 L L O 211 4.4 155 6.5 1 174 4.4 302 8.2 011/15/14 at ARIZONA 53 +8 59 26-27 L W U 245 4.1 259 8.6 3 133 3.3 242 6.1 311/22/14 OREGON ST 41 -6 53.5 37-13 W W U 226 6.5 255 10.6 1 47 2.0 314 6.8 111/29/14 at WASHINGTON ST 40 -3.5 62.5 31-13 W W U 188 5.1 249 6.1 1 21 1.2 355 7.2 3



(271) OKLAHOMA ST [SU:6-6 | ATS:5-7]

Head Coach: Mike Gundy • Conference: Big 12

(272) WASHINGTON (-5 | 57) [SU:8-5 | ATS:7-6]Head Coach: Chris Petersen • Conference: Pac-12


Oklahoma St 55.5 57

Washington -6.5 -5

First-year coach Chris Peterson found out a lot about a different kind of scrutiny in moving from Boise to Seattle. Washington was 0-5 against the five ranked teams it faced (2-3 ATS). The offense figured to scuffle with a new quarterback and new system, but eight touchdowns in those defeats was on Huskies fans radar. Washington had three All-Pac 12 selections on defense, led by LB Shaq Thompson. A 9-win season and bowl victory would help Peterson prove the program is headed in right direction. It was an odd year for Oklahoma State, with its young team testing Florida State in the opener, then winning five straight. Next came five losses in a row against the class of the Big 12 before an unpredictable road win in Bedlam game. Besides the talented DE Emmanuel Ogbah, Okie State fans are thrilled about the emergence of freshman QB Mason Rudolph late in the season.


85

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


85


SUN DEVIL STADIUM (TEMPE, AZ)

• OKLAHOMA ST is 14-4 ATS(L5Y) - Against solid rushing defenses yielding less than 3.35 yards per carry(CS)

• WASHINGTON is 5-9 ATS(L3Y) - Against lesser defensive teams yielding more than 5.7 yards per play(CS)

• OKLAHOMA ST is 7-1 OVER(L3Y) - Non-conference games

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?271 OKLAHOMA ST 57 45 22.5 29.2 OKST 25.5 272 WASHINGTON -5 50 -5 30.2 29.7 30.6

RECENT OKLAHOMA ST BOWL GAME LOG RECENT WASHINGTON BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

1/2/10 OLE MISS (Cotton) 7-21 L 3.5 L 51U 12/31/02 PURDUE (Sun) 24-34 L -1.5 L 56O12/29/10 ARIZONA (Alamo) 36-10 W -4.5 W 68.5U 12/30/10 NEBRASKA (Holiday) 19-7 W 12 W 55U1/2/12 STANFORD (Fiesta) 41-38 W -4.5 L 73O 12/29/11 BAYLOR (Alamo) 56-67 L 8 L 79O1/1/13 PURDUE (Heart Of Dallas) 58-14 W -18 W 69O 12/22/12 BOISE ST (Las Vegas) 26-28 L 4 W 44O1/3/14 MISSOURI (Cotton) 31-41 L -3 L 62O 12/27/13 BYU (San Francisco) 31-16 W -6 W 65.5U

RECENT OKLAHOMA ST BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT WASHINGTON BOWL GAME TRENDS* FAVORITES are 6-2 SU & ATS in L8 OKLAHOMA ST bowl games * WASHINGTON is on a stretch of 6-2 ATS in bowl games* OKLAHOMA ST is 0-4 SU & 0-3-1 ATS as bowl game dog since '97 * UNDERDOGS are 4-2 ATS in WASHINGTON's prior six bowl games* L3 OSU bowl games went OVER the total, producing 74.3 PPG * HUSKIES are 1-4 SU but 3-2 ATS inL5 bowl games vs Big 12 foes

RECENT CACTUS BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U12/31/09 MINNESOTA (B10) 13 IOWA ST (B12) 14 -1.5 47 IOWA ST (B12) IOWA ST (B12) DOG DOG UNDER12/28/10 MISSOURI (B12) 24 IOWA (B10) 27 -3 46 IOWA (B10) IOWA (B10) DOG DOG OVER12/30/11 OKLAHOMA (B12) 31 IOWA (B10) 14 -14 58 OKLAHOMA (B12) OKLAHOMA (B12) FAV FAV UNDER12/29/12 TCU (B12) 16 MICHIGAN ST (B10) 17 -1.5 40 MICHIGAN ST (B10) MICHIGAN ST (B10) DOG DOG UNDER12/28/13 KANSAS ST (B12) 31 MICHIGAN (B10) 14 -7 52.5 KANSAS ST (B12) KANSAS ST (B12) FAV FAV UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Friday, January 2, 2015 - (271) OKLAHOMA ST vs. (272) WASHINGTON (-5)Washington Washington Washington Washington Washington Washington Washington Washington

Friday, January 2, 2015 - (271) OKLAHOMA ST vs. (272) WASHINGTON - TOTAL (57)OVER UNDER OVER OVER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER

Consensus says: The full lineup of our consensus pickers sides with Washington in the Ticket City Cactus Bowl. Reasons are plentiful, perhaps no more clearly than Oklahoma State’s status as a deserving bowl team. The Cowboys are 6-6 this season, and needed an improbable upset over rival Oklahoma in the season finale to get here. The Sooners were really plagued by the injury to starting QB Trevor Knight in that game. Prior to that win, OSU was tagged by 21 points or more in five straight games. Washington meanwhile, enjoyed an 8-5 season in the first year under HC Chris Petersen and really seemed to be developing great offensive balance down the stretch. The consensus also calls for a slight lean UNDER the total, with OSU’s late season offensive struggles contributing mightily to that speculation.

The Cactus Bowl game at Sun Devil Stadium in Tempe is aptly named and takes the place of the old Buffalo Wild Wings & Insight Bowl games. Usually played late in December each year, this one is being played on January 2nd. The matchup pits Oklahoma State and Washington, a pair of teams that underachieved in 2014 by most standards. The Cowboys only found their way here after shocking Oklahoma to wind up 6-6. The Huskies are 8-5 and rightfully favored. Big 12 teams have gone 5-2 ATS in the L7 years of this game, however this is the first time in that span that they are matching up against a non-Big Ten team. Coincidence or not, the designated HOME team in this bowl game series is on a big run of 9-1 ATS. For this season, that team is Washington. In terms of totals, three straight have gone UNDER after an OVER run of 14-4-1 from ’92 to 2010.

This is the matchup for the new Ticket City Cactus Bowl, which replaces the Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl at ASU’s Sun Devil Stadium. These teams split two games in the 1980s: The Cowboys won 31-17 in Seattle in 1985; the Huskies won 24-18 in Stillwater in 1980. Both Mike Gundy and Chris Peterson are 5-3 SU in bowls, the latter all while at Boise State.



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


86




BIRMINGHAM BOWL • 1:00 PM ET (ESPN) – JAN 3, 2015

EAST CAROLINA 37.2 29 33-166 [5.0] 47-31-367 [7.7] 14.3 25.7 21 33-107 [3.3] 39-23-263 [6.7] 14.4 -4 +11.5 FLORIDA 30.5 18 43-189 [4.4] 27-14-181 [6.7] 12.1 21.2 17 37-114 [3.1] 33-18-194 [5.9] 14.5 +6 +9.3 EAST CAROLINA 30.7 26 33-163 [4.9] 45-28-328 [7.2] 16.0 29.5 22 35-127 [3.6] 39-21-254 [6.6] 12.9 -2 +1.2 FLORIDA 24.4 16 44-202 [4.6] 23-10-116 [5.0] 13.0 21.0 19 36-126 [3.5] 37-22-265 [7.2] 18.6 +7 +3.4

EAST CAROLINA 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 NC CENTRAL 18 -39.5 58.5 52-7 W W O 208 7.4 374 8.1 2 70 2.3 104 4.7 19/6/14 at SOUTH CAROLINA 50 +14.5 65 23-33 L W U 132 6.3 321 7.0 2 175 4.6 266 7.0 19/13/14 at VIRGINIA TECH 43 +10 53.5 28-21 W W U 75 3.0 427 9.1 1 91 2.8 298 5.3 29/20/14 NORTH CAROLINA 43 +1 67 70-41 W W O 343 7.5 446 8.7 1 145 3.7 294 6.8 110/4/14 SMU 18 -39 59.5 45-24 W L O 171 5.2 410 10.0 1 51 2.8 339 5.1 110/11/14 at SOUTH FLORIDA 29 -17 57 28-17 W L U 231 6.2 250 7.4 1 93 3.4 257 6.1 110/23/14 CONNECTICUT 23 -28 55.5 31-21 W L U 135 3.9 445 6.8 1 84 3.2 313 9.8 111/1/14 at TEMPLE 37 -10 61 10-20 L L U 215 4.7 217 5.2 5 65 1.8 70 3.7 011/13/14 at CINCINNATI 47 -1 71.5 46-54 L L O 154 4.8 418 6.7 2 150 4.5 436 9.7 411/22/14 TULANE 29 -19.5 61 34-6 W W U 139 4.2 358 8.1 0 24 0.9 301 7.0 111/28/14 at TULSA 27 -19 70 49-32 W L O 172 4.6 338 8.0 1 189 4.2 199 6.2 212/4/14 UCF 45 -6.5 55 30-32 L L O 14 0.5 397 8.1 3 148 3.7 274 8.3 1FLORIDA 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO9/6/14 E MICHIGAN 11 -41 56.5 65-0 W W O 259 6.6 396 8.4 0 80 2.4 45 2.1 59/13/14 KENTUCKY 43 -18 55 36-30 W L O 237 4.7 295 6.7 1 81 2.5 369 8.2 39/20/14 at ALABAMA 68 +14 51 21-42 L L O 107 4.0 93 3.3 3 196 3.8 449 12.8 410/4/14 at TENNESSEE 49 +1 52 10-9 W W U 156 3.3 76 2.8 3 28 1.0 205 5.3 310/11/14 LSU 56 +2.5 44.5 27-30 L L O 123 3.8 183 7.3 3 195 3.9 110 5.0 010/18/14 MISSOURI 52 -7 44.5 13-42 L L O 135 2.8 148 4.8 6 99 3.2 20 1.1 111/1/14 vs. GEORGIA 61 +11.5 45.5 38-20 W W O 418 7.0 27 4.5 1 141 4.4 319 7.6 111/8/14 at VANDERBILT 30 -14.5 43 34-10 W W O 214 4.3 215 9.8 0 83 3.5 225 5.0 411/15/14 SOUTH CAROLINA 50 -6.5 57 20-23 L L U 218 4.4 60 5.5 1 95 2.5 206 4.9 111/22/14 E KENTUCKY 20 -31 51 52-3 W W O 104 2.7 326 14.2 1 79 1.8 63 2.2 111/29/14 at FLORIDA ST 58 +6.5 54 19-24 L W U 113 3.4 169 5.3 2 181 4.4 125 5.2 4



(273) EAST CAROLINA [SU:8-4 | ATS:5-7]

Head Coach: Ruffin McNeil • Conference: The American

(274) FLORIDA (-7 | 57) [SU:6-5 | ATS:6-5]Head Coach: Jim McElwain • Conference: SEC


East Carolina 57.5 57

Florida -8.5 -7

East Carolina’s Shane Carden and Justin Hardy are one of the most dangerous QB-WR combos in the country. Carden finished second in the nation in passing yards (4,309), and Hardy was fifth in receiving (1,334), setting the NCAA record for career receptions. The Pirates will be tested by a Florida’s No. 9 defense, which held opposing teams 6.2 PPG below their average. ECU only covered one of its AAC conference clashes as it defense was beatable, especially via the pass (262.6 YPG). Fortunately for the East Carolina, the Gators only throw for 181 YPG. QB Treon Harris will be auditioning for his new coach Jim McElwain, who likes to throw the ball. Harris will no doubt spend a great Deal of time working on his mechanics to be a more effective passer. Florida will not want to compete in a scoring-fest and play this game more at their pace.


87

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


87


LEGION FIELD (BIRMINGHAM, AL)

• EAST CAROLINA is 9-5 ATS(L3Y) - Non-conference games• FLORIDA is 3-8 ATS(L2Y) - Against strong teams outscoring opponents by more than 10 points per

game(CS)• FLORIDA is 9-3 OVER(S2000) - In January Bowl Games

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?273 EAST CAROLINA 57 44 25.0 27.3 ECU 28.2 274 FLORIDA -7 53 -9.3 33.9 29.2 32.5

RECENT EAST CAROLINA BOWL GAME LOG RECENT FLORIDA BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

1/2/09 KENTUCKY (Liberty) 19-25 L -3 L 41O 1/8/09 OKLAHOMA (Bcs Championship Game)24-14 W -4 W 69U1/2/10 ARKANSAS (Liberty) 17-20 L 7.5 W 60U 1/1/10 CINCINNATI (Sugar) 51-24 W -12 W 59O12/29/10 MARYLAND (Military) 20-51 L 8 L 70.5O 1/1/11 PENN ST (Outback) 37-24 W -7 W 47.5O12/22/12 LA LAFAYETTE (New Orleans) 34-43 L 6.5 L 70O 1/2/12 OHIO ST (Gator) 24-17 W -2.5 W 44U12/23/13 OHIO U (St Peterburg) 37-20 W -14 W 63.5U 1/2/13 LOUISVILLE (Sugar) 23-33 L -14 L 47.5O

RECENT EAST CAROLINA BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT FLORIDA BOWL GAME TRENDS* EAST CAROLINA's win over OHIO LY snapped 4-game bowl losing skid * FLORIDA is 6-2 SU & ATS in its L8 bowl games* FAVORITES have swept the L3 ECU bowl games SU & ATS * OVER the total is 10-3-1 in FLORIDA's L14 bowl contests* PIRATES' L2 bowl games vs SEC foes were losses by combined 9 pts * FLORIDA hasn't played non-power conference team in bowl since '73

RECENT BIRMINGHAM BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U1/2/10 SOUTH CAROLINA (SEC) 7 CONNECTICUT (BEAST) 20 -4 50.5 CONNECTICUT (BEAST) CONNECTICUT (BEAST) DOG DOG UNDER1/8/11 PITTSBURGH (BEAST) 27 KENTUCKY (SEC) 10 -4.5 52 PITTSBURGH (BEAST) PITTSBURGH (BEAST) FAV FAV UNDER1/7/12 PITTSBURGH (BEAST) 6 SMU (CUSA) 28 -4 47.5 SMU (CUSA) SMU (CUSA) DOG DOG UNDER1/5/13 OLE MISS (SEC) 38 PITTSBURGH (BEAST) 17 -4 54 OLE MISS (SEC) OLE MISS (SEC) FAV FAV OVER1/4/14 VANDERBILT (SEC) 41 HOUSTON (AAC) 24 -1.5 53 VANDERBILT (SEC) VANDERBILT (SEC) FAV FAV OVER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Saturday, January 3, 2015 - (273) EAST CAROLINA vs. (274) FLORIDA (-7)East Carolina* Florida East Carolina Florida Florida Florida East Carolina Florida

Saturday, January 3, 2015 - (273) EAST CAROLINA vs. (274) FLORIDA - TOTAL (57)OVER OVER UNDER UNDER* OVER OVER OVER OVER

Jim says: Florida was just 6-5 this season, but would have been 7-5 had it played the suspended game against Idaho. Even still, that just isn’t good enough in Gainesville, and it cost head coach Will Muschamp his job. The season wasn’t without highlights though, as a highly motivated Gators’ team crushed Georgia and almost upset Florida State. That’s commendable performances in two of 11 games. Why would they get up for this game when they had such trouble doing so in others. East Carolina as an opponent just doesn’t get the blood boiling for Gator Nation. On the other sideline, the Pirates are sure to be motivated to take down a SEC power. Sometimes motivational edge can make all the difference in a bowl game.

Florida managed a 6-5 record in 2014 and finds itself in the unfamiliar territory of a very lowly regarded bowl game. Playing in the Birmingham Bowl in Alabama, the opponent won’t exactly get the Gators’ blood boiling either. That said, East Carolina is probably stoked to be taking on a SEC power after a rewarding 8-4 season. SEC teams have taken care of business the last two years here, winning by margins of 21 & 17 points. A similar win would easily get the job done for bettors of Florida. Those two games also went OVER the total, after all of the first six games in this series resulted in UNDER’s. Incidentally, ECU played in the inaugural Birmingham Bowl game in 2006 and lost 24-7 to South Florida.

The only previous meeting before this matchup in the Birmingham Bowl came back in 1983. The Gators won it, 24-17 in Gainesville. Ruffin McNeal is 1-2 SU in bowls at East Carolina, and is coming off a 37-20 SU/ATS cover over Ohio in last year’s Beef O’Brady’s Bowl. This is the Gators’ first bowl since being upset 33-23 by Louisville in the 2012-13 Sugar Bowl.



THE BREAKDOWN

LINE TRACKER

STAT MATCHUPS

TEAM GAME LOGS


88




GODADDY BOWL • 9:00 PM ET (ESPN) – JAN 4, 2015

TOLEDO 34.4 24 43-252 [5.8] 31-18-240 [7.8] 14.3 29.3 22 33-120 [3.6] 37-22-285 [7.6] 13.8 -4 +5.1 ARKANSAS ST 36.1 24 45-230 [5.1] 35-21-248 [7.1] 13.2 27.8 21 43-192 [4.5] 32-18-219 [6.9] 14.8 +7 +8.3 TOLEDO 31.7 23 43-235 [5.4] 30-18-247 [8.2] 15.2 29.5 21 32-134 [4.1] 36-23-276 [7.6] 13.9 0 +2.2 ARKANSAS ST 33.7 23 44-200 [4.5] 39-24-269 [6.9] 13.9 35.5 23 45-236 [5.2] 29-16-214 [7.4] 12.7 +6 -1.8

TOLEDO 2014 GAME LOGOPP

DATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 NEW HAMPSHIRE 38 -11.5 63.5 54-20 W W O 314 7.3 360 10.0 0 37 1.2 338 7.5 19/6/14 MISSOURI 52 +3.5 61 24-49 L L O 154 4.8 256 5.8 2 177 3.8 325 9.8 29/12/14 vs. CINCINNATI 47 +9.5 58 34-58 L L O 240 6.2 323 7.5 1 148 4.9 436 10.4 09/20/14 BALL ST 30 -14 59.5 34-23 W L U 318 6.8 152 6.9 2 175 4.2 176 6.5 09/27/14 C MICHIGAN 34 -10.5 59 42-28 W W O 204 5.4 339 10.0 2 95 3.7 291 9.4 210/4/14 at W MICHIGAN 37 -5 61.5 20-19 W L U 274 7.6 210 7.8 3 62 1.9 388 10.2 010/11/14 at IOWA ST 32 +3.5 61.5 30-37 L L O 236 5.8 189 5.3 0 103 3.0 351 6.6 010/25/14 MASSACHUSETTS 23 -17 69.5 42-35 W L O 295 6.0 225 6.6 2 52 2.6 445 7.8 211/4/14 at KENT ST 25 -13 58 30-20 W L U 226 4.8 211 6.6 1 171 9.0 173 4.2 311/11/14 at N ILLINOIS 40 +3.5 61.5 24-27 L W U 263 5.4 209 9.1 0 226 4.9 190 8.6 011/19/14 BOWLING GREEN 29 -7 59 27-20 W T U 325 6.1 63 3.2 3 104 2.7 187 5.1 011/28/14 at E MICHIGAN 11 -22.5 60.5 52-16 W W O 172 3.7 341 17.1 0 96 2.8 119 5.2 2ARKANSAS ST 2014 GAME LOG

OPPDATE OPPONENT PR LINE OU SCORE SU ATS OU YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO YDS RYPA YDS PYPA TO8/30/14 MONTANA ST 24 -12.5 54.5 37-10 W W U 294 6.1 264 8.8 2 86 2.0 142 5.5 29/6/14 at TENNESSEE 49 +16 58.5 19-34 L W U 141 3.4 190 5.3 1 168 3.7 247 6.5 19/13/14 at MIAMI FL 47 +14 52 20-41 L L O 93 2.0 236 5.6 2 146 4.2 342 13.2 29/20/14 UTAH ST 42 -2.5 45.5 21-14 W W U 126 2.7 190 5.8 4 145 3.9 268 5.7 110/4/14 LA MONROE 29 -10 53.5 28-14 W W U 288 5.6 284 7.9 3 72 2.9 276 5.9 210/11/14 at GEORGIA ST 13 -10.5 62 52-10 W W U 384 7.2 234 7.8 2 71 2.1 198 5.1 210/21/14 at LA LAFAYETTE 31 -3 59 40-55 L L O 253 6.8 342 8.8 1 419 7.5 102 6.0 011/1/14 at IDAHO 17 -15.5 65.5 44-28 W W O 198 4.1 244 8.4 1 243 5.3 206 6.6 811/8/14 S ALABAMA 28 -11 52.5 45-10 W W O 214 4.4 186 5.5 0 111 3.1 90 3.6 411/15/14 APPALACHIAN ST 31 -15 61.5 32-37 L L O 167 5.6 147 5.1 1 294 4.7 255 11.6 211/20/14 at TEXAS ST UNIV 30 -6.5 58 27-45 L L O 132 3.3 366 6.4 1 370 6.5 192 8.7 111/29/14 NEW MEXICO ST 13 -23 65 68-35 W W O 469 9.2 295 13.4 2 178 5.2 314 7.3 2



(275) TOLEDO (-3 | 67) [SU:8-4 | ATS:4-7-1]

Head Coach: Matt Campbell • Conference: MAC

(276) ARKANSAS ST [SU:7-5 | ATS:8-4]Head Coach: Blake Anderson • Conference: Sun Belt


Toledo -1.5 -3

Arkansas St 66 67

There should be no shortage of points in the last bowl before the national title game, featuring two robust offenses and two defenses that give up the points. Toledo averaged 34.4 PPG despite losing their starting quarterback in the season opener. The Rockets defense was abysmal in the first third of the season but played better afterwards and lost by just three points to Northern Illinois in the contest that determined the MAC West winner. Arkansas State averaged 36.1 PPG and looked like a real threat to win the Sun Belt with its only two losses on the road in the first half of the season at Miami-Fl. and at Tennessee. In the second half of the season the defense collapsed, allowing 35 PPG. Expect this MAC vs. SBC conflict to be about scoring touchdowns and making stops with how these two squads have playing this season.


89

TOP GAME TRENDS

STRENGTH RATINGS


TEAM BOWL HISTORY

BOWL SERIES HISTORY

PICKS (*=BEST BET)


89


LADD-PEEBLES STADIUM (MOBILE, AL)

• ARKANSAS ST is 9-2 ATS(L2Y) - Against good teams with 60%+ winning pct(CS)• TOLEDO is 3-10 ATS(L5Y) - Against elite rushing teams averaging more than 5.0 yards per

carry(CS)• TOLEDO is 10-1 UNDER(L3Y) - Against high-scoring teams averaging 32 PPG or more(CS)

BRD Power Ratings Effective Strg Simulation Bettors’ Rtng#’’s Teams Actual Rtg Line Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge? Proj Edge?275 TOLEDO -3 39 31.1 UNDER 34.0 30.6 UNDER276 ARKANSAS ST 67 34 4.8 31.1 30.2 28.1

RECENT TOLEDO BOWL GAME LOG RECENT ARKANSAS ST BOWL GAME LOGDATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT DATE OPPONENT (Bowl Name) SC SU FL ATS FT

12/27/04 CONNECTICUT (Motor City) 10-39 L -3.5 L 65.5U 12/20/05 SOUTHERN MISS (New Orleans) 19-31 L 15 W 49.5O12/21/05 UTEP (Godaddy) 45-13 W -3 W 62.5U 1/8/12 N ILLINOIS (Godaddy) 20-38 L -1.5 L 66U12/26/10 FLA INTERNATIONAL (Little Caesars)32-34 L 2 T 58.5O 1/6/13 KENT ST (Godaddy) 17-13 W -3 W 63.5U12/28/11 AIR FORCE (Military) 42-41 W -3 L 68.5O 1/5/14 BALL ST (Godaddy) 23-20 W 6.5 W 65.5U12/15/12 UTAH ST (Famous Idaho Potato) 15-41 L 10 L 60.5U

RECENT TOLEDO BOWL GAME TRENDS RECENT ARKANSAS ST BOWL GAME TRENDS* TOLEDO is 2-4 SU & 1-4-1 ATS in L6 bowl games * ARKANSAS STATE has played MAC team in L3 bowl games* TOLEDO is playing in first ever January bowl game * The L3 ARKANSAS STATE bowl games went UNDER the total* FAVORITES are 6-1 SU & 4-2-1 ATS in L7 TOLEDO bowl games * ASU is 3-1 ATS all-time in bowl games despite scoring just 19.8 PPG

RECENT GODADDY BOWL GAMESDATE FAVORITE (CONF) SC UNDERDOG (CONF) SC FL FT SU WINNER ATS WINNER SU ATS O/U1/6/10 C MICHIGAN (MAC) 44 TROY (SBC) 41 -3.5 63 C MICHIGAN (MAC) TROY (SBC) FAV DOG OVER1/6/11 MIDDLE TENN ST (SBC) 21 MIAMI OHIO (MAC) 35 -1.5 49 MIAMI OHIO (MAC) MIAMI OHIO (MAC) DOG DOG OVER1/8/12 ARKANSAS ST (SBC) 20 N ILLINOIS (MAC) 38 -1.5 66 N ILLINOIS (MAC) N ILLINOIS (MAC) DOG DOG UNDER1/6/13 ARKANSAS ST (SBC) 17 KENT ST (MAC) 13 -3 63.5 ARKANSAS ST (SBC) ARKANSAS ST (SBC) FAV FAV UNDER1/5/14 BALL ST (MAC) 20 ARKANSAS ST (SBC) 23 -6.5 65.5 ARKANSAS ST (SBC) ARKANSAS ST (SBC) DOG DOG UNDER

VI Jim

VI Jason

VI Paul

Steve Makinen

Power Rating

Effective Strength

Bettors Ratings

Consensus

Sunday, January 4, 2015 - (275) TOLEDO vs. (276) ARKANSAS ST (+3)Toledo Toledo Arkansas St Toledo Toledo Arkansas St Arkansas St Toledo

Sunday, January 4, 2015 - (275) TOLEDO vs. (276) ARKANSAS ST - TOTAL (67)UNDER* UNDER OVER OVER UNDER UNDER UNDER UNDER

Jim says: The final bowl game before the national title contest pits Toledo and Arkansas State in the GoDaddy Bowl. By the time this game rolls around, there will be plenty of fans, and teams for that matter, fatigued of bowl games, and just anxious to get on to the big game. That might be a reason why seven of the L9 games in this bowl series have gone UNDER the total. Sun Belt teams have also seen a early trend of high scoring bowl games reverse in recent years as well, with UNDER the total going 6-1-1 in the L8 bowl games featuring teams from that league. In terms of this matchup, Arkansas State boasts a much better defense than you might think, and Toledo has gone UNDER the total in nine straight games against teams averaging 31 PPG or more. Take a less than publicly popular UNDER play here.

Arkansas State is punching its ticket to the GoDaddy Bowl in Mobile, AL for the fourth straight season. The Red Wolves are looking for a third straight win as well after pulling out close victories over MAC teams in both the 2013 & 2014 games. This year’s opponent is Toledo, who has an impressive 45-13 GoDaddy Bowl win on its record from 2005. The Rockets will be looking to reverse a trend of MAC teams going 2-6 ATS in the L8 installments of this game. UNDER’s and underdogs have been big performers in this bowl game in recent years as well, with UNDER the total on a run of 7-2 since ’05 and dogs converting ATS in four of the L5 seasons.

The Red Wolves are making their fourth consecutive appearance in the GoDaddy.com bowl (2-1 SU & ATS), but with a different coach each time (Blake Anderson, Bryan Harsin, John Thompson in place of Gus Malzahn, Hugh Freeze). Toledo won both previous matchups in the early 1990s: 49-0 and 43-28, both as home favorites. Toledo’s Matt Campbell is 1-1 SU/0-2 ATS in bowls.

welcome college football fans! - vegasinsider.com€¦ · and conference usa teams, which were both...

Documents