Bo Inspires Cover/ND Voodoo to Bring Same?

Last week's game of the century turned out to be the game of the season for me, as Michigan covered the seven point spread, not to mention my teased 14 point spread, while Ohio State covered my teased spread as a pick, and BOTH teams covered the teased over (the tease brought the over from 42 down to 35--Michigan scored 39 and OSU topped them with 42; maybe I shoulda kept it simple and just bet the over...). That made three won bets for me on one game. Auburn's 22-15 victory over 'Bama covered the ridiculously low 2 point spread, while Indy lost to Dallas, 21-14, failing to cover the ridiculously low 1.5 point spread. The fuck do I know?

So, Bo Schembechler's expertly timed death inspired Michigan to keep the game close enough to cover the spread. What did you expect? Anyway, the key to Michigan's season could be a Notre Dame victory at 'SC in a few hours, assuming voters (and the BCS computer) will remember the trouncing the Irish suffered at the hands of the Wolverines. Word is an 'SC victory will be enough to bump up the Trojans, even if it is too close to impress the public. Should Bo have waited a week to die? Clearly this would not have done any good, as the Fighting Irish are not about to be inspired by his death. If Coach Holtz isn't willing to step up the way Bo did, there probably isn't anybody else that could do the job. Maybe Ara Parseghian....the Irish may love Charlie Weis, but he hasn't been around long enough to whip them into a frenzy by uncannily dying the day before the big game.

Which isn't to say he hasn't given it some thought. Charlie Weis is all about motivating the troops. Apparently he's been making his team listen to "Fight On," and "Conquest," both USC fight songs, or hymns, as ESPN calls them. (There is a song that the 'SC band plays that I think really kicks ass. I'm guessing it's one of these. I never wondered about the title before; now I'm wondering if it has words, and whether or not the words are really gay.) Meanwhile, Uncle Chuck already busted out the Kelly Green last week for the big game against Army. Army? Apparently the last home game for the '06-'07 seniors was reason enough for the special occasion gear. Some may speculate that Weis used the greens last week because he can't do it this week on the road. You may have heard that Chuck would dress his team in sequined green bananna hammocks with matching vests and bow ties if

a.) it would inspire them to win,

and

b.) it was allowed.

Especially if it helped them beat 'SC. Don't you believe it. Weis is way too much of a traditionalist. So much so that he hasn't even checked to see if fetish gear is within the rules. Ditto for kazoos and party hats. Weis is so traditional that he just may run certain traditions into the ground. As for rumors that somebody recieved a briefcase full of Euros to croak the pharmacist that writes Pete Carroll's ritalin perscription, well, there's no proof that any such perscription even exists. You heard it here first.

Cynics among you may speculate that Pete Carroll's perscriptions (or lack thereof) are utterly irrelevant. It is probably next to impossible to recruit 90+ blue chip pro-football prospects in this day and age without attracting more ADD cases, sterroid addled freaks and drug users running the gamut from caual and/or experimental to abusive and/or highly connected. Take such a mix of addicts, chemically enhanced monsters and other criminals and set them down in the middle of Los Angeles and you're looking at a situation that makes Lord of the Flies look like Head of the Class. Given the obvious potential for disaster, Pete Carroll's track record shapes up as ranking him somehwere between Abraham Lincoln and Moses. If Coach has a thing for Ritalin, or a thing for Utah crystal methanphedamine, cooked in a bathtub in a brothel run by defrocked Morman Clergy, and hand delivered by a flotilla of rabid bikers, chased with high-grade horse-tranquilizers for that matter, who would dare to complain? His mother or a victim of a 12-step program, that's who. Only they would ever show such distorted priorities. Anyone else would hang their head in shame.

................................................................................

I stayed up all night to watch SC-ND, and was watching it as I finished writing the above. I was pretty burnt by the time the game ended, so I neglected to deliver my picks, not that you would want them.

I did two three-bet teasers. My intent was to give myself a situation like last week where I had OSU and the over, and Michigan and the over. Then I found out that three bet teasers paid out better odds; a six point tease paid 9 to 5, a 6.5 point tease paid 8 to 5, a 7 point tease paid 7 to 5, and a 10 point tease paid 10 to 11.

In the end I had a 6 point tease on Notre Dame, the over, and the Louisville-Pittsburgh over, and I had a 10 point tease on USC, the over, and Louisville. These worked out to

notredame(+14.5)
nd-USC OVER51
lou-PITT OVER53

and

USC(+1.5)
nd-USC OVER47
louisville(-.5)

I took the 6 point tease on Notre Dame because I wanted to move the 8.5 point spread to 14.5. I wanted to be able to win even if ND lost by 14. I went for a ten point tease on the other because I wanted to turn Louisville into a pick in case Pittsburgh kept it close. Unfortunately, I would have turned a profit if I'd gone for the 6 point tease on both, as my latter bet didn't need so much help (actually, none of these bets needed to be teased at all). Meanwhile, Notre Dame got within the 14.5 point spread for only a play, scoring a touchdown to close to being down 13, 37-24, only to let their onside kick be returned for a score on the next play. At the end of the game I was in the money for about 6 seconds of game time, until Notre Dame gave up their flukeish score. Ick. My SC bet covered the other, while if I'd won the other bet instead I would have turned a profit. Obviously if I'd won both I'd do better yet. If I'd bet each outcome individually, I'd win on Louisville and that game's over, and on the other over. If I was betting on the individual outcomes I wouldn't have taken both Notre Dame and USC, barring strange fluctuations in the spread. I'm not sure what the implications of these considerations are but...

This week I took the over for USC-UCLA and Oklahoma-Nebraska, and the under for Florida-Arkansas, as a three game tease. All three lost. Had I bet on them individuallly, all three would have lost, and I would have lost three bets. Ewwwww!

Well, Kansas City managed a little comeback last week, and only lost 13-10. Still lost, still didn't cover. Great. In the late game, Denver managed to get behind 13-7, before coming back. I was really hoping they would get a field goal, so they would trail 13-10. Then they would need another score, which would hopefully be a touchdown, which would put them ahaead of my teased spread. Otherwise, a field goal to tie the game at 13 would require another score, which, as long as it was more than a field goal (and was scored by Denver, rather than Oakland), would also make the Broncos cover.

Unfortunately, Denver got a touchdown, and took the lead 14-13. This was the only scenario where Denver would have the lead without covering my teased spread. I was hoping for a field goal (at least) at this point, as I watched the tail end of season 1 of Weeds. Eventually I looked over at my computer, and discovered that Denver had kicked another field goal as I watched suburbanites smoke their way to Krypton. Go Broncos! Denver held on and won 17-13, managing to come abck without hitting the over. Apparantly my money wasn't safe with Jake the Snake (there's a shock), but Denver did come through, salvaging my weekend.

This weekend I'm tempted to lay the 9.5 on KANSAS CITY over oakland, since the Chiefs do have a nasty homefield advantage at Arrowhead. My close call at Oakland last week, along with KC's disappointing performance at Miami has dissuaded me however.

Meanwhile, indy is a point and a half favorite at DALLAS, and I don't see HOW anyone can NOT take the Colts. Bill Simmons says he likes Dallas in this game, more or less admits this is bizzare, but doesn't explain his pick at all. Maybe this falls under his new rule from last week where you go with the underdogs unless it pains you to do so. Well, it would pain me to take Dallas here. I know Indy has its weaknesses, and that they probably won't make it through the season unbeaten, but is Dallas the team to exploit these weaknesses? They are 0-3 in their division. Tremendous. I suspect Simmons wants to pick the week Indy loses so he will look clever. Well, if this week doesn't work out he's got six more chances.

Meanwhile, in the game of the century, #1 OHIO STATE is favored by seven over #2 michigan, and based on their performances this year, I think the Buckeyes deserve to be favored by every point of this spread. On the other hand, Michigan managed to jump out to a lead last year without Mike Hart. If I'm Michigan I may not feel safe with a ten point lead here, but I'd feel pretty good with an extra seven points. Strangely enough, Bo Schembechler managed to die the day before the game. If his death doesn't give Michigan a psychological edge going into this game I don't know what will. Will it be enough to beat OSU? I've taken michigan(+7)overOHIOSTATE.

The second half of Michigan State-Penn State has just started (MSU leads 13-7) and bodog is now allowing teases on OSU--U-M! (They weren't before.) I have just taken two teasers. I've taken Michigan and the over, and Ohio State and the over. What does this mean? I'll tell you.

Michigan and the over: The over/under is currently 42. With a 7 point tease, this bet is michigan(+14)overOHIOSTATE, over 35.

Ohio State and the over: Again, the over/under is 42 (earlier it was 40.5). 7 the other way gives me OHIOSTATE(pick)overmichigan, over 35.

Watch. Ohio State will win 20-14, I will cover the spread both ways, and the under will come in despite the tease. Or worse, OSU wins 21-13, and I lose all three of my bets. Great.

Currently auburn(-2.5)ALABAMA is the line for that rivalry game. Earlier in the week Auburn was favored by three, but when I bet on the game a couple of hours ago the spread was down to two, so I have auburn(-2)over'BAMA. Auburn is an atrocious 1-7 vs. the spread in their last 8 games, but this really feels like an 8 or 9 point game to me. Rivalry upsets notwithstanding, I really think Auburn can squeeze out a 3 point victory here.

RoQQ $$ safe with Snake(?)

A quote from Bill Simmons' column this week:

Well, we're nine weeks into the NFL season and the underdogs are 15 games better than .5000. Just in the past four weeks, 27 of 33 underdogs covered AND won outright. It's a financial catastrophe. It's a gambling quagmire. I have friends calling me just to say, "Yo, I closed up shop -- going cold turkey until the playoffs." I have readers e-mailing me just to tell me, "I've lost 14 of 16 teasers this season." I have other readers telling me that they did a George Costanza a few weeks ago (went the opposite of what they would have done) and had big weeks ever since.

After the cliff my season fell off of, I guess it just feels good to know that I'm not alone. Having said that, it used to be my strategy to try to find underdogs I had some confidence in to bet on, at least for the NFL. If I'd stuck to this strategy I could be in the middle of a great year right now.

Meanwhile, I got the impression that the networks must have been noticing the same things Simmons was when he argued that the Detroit Lions could be the team that comes out of nowhere to beat the spread every game in the second half of the season, because when I tuned in to FOX at 3am to see what was on with my TVU player, I got the 'Niners at Detroit! You never know what you're gonna get in Korea. Well, you never know what you're gonna get with the Lions either, but right now they're down 13-0. Looks like any attempts to shed their pessimism by Lions fans might be a little premature.

Spreaking of pessimism, I got two bets in this morning. The first,
chiefs(+1.5)overDOLPHINS has already turned against me, as Miami has jumped out to a 13-0 lead. Seems to be going around. Take your vitamins.

My other pick is a teaser, Denver and the under. Worked last time the Broncos and Raiders met, and while Denver has started scoring more, the Raider offense is atrocious. With the tease, I have DENVER(-2.5), under40. The way things have been going for me, look for the Raiders to have a breakout day offensively. Actually I'm more concerned that Mike Shanahan amy be gaining confidence in Jake Plummer, to the point where he will let him do his thing. This could lead to alot of points being scored. Or alot of interceptons. This is Jake Plummer we're talking about. (Would you feel safe if your stockbroker was called "Jake the Snake?" Just asking.)

Detroit closed out the first half with a field goal, and trails 13-3. Since my earlier surprise I realized that Korea tends to show whatever the west coast is watching, since they are closest. So in a sense the 'Niners are the local team here in Tonducheon.

Noteworthy Events....

Kenny Rodgers pitches another 8 shutout innings in the World Series, moving him within two innings of the record for consecutive scoreless playoff innings pitched. His efforts were marred only by the sighting of what was believed to be pine tar on the palm of his left (pitching) hand, in the same place it was discovered during earlier starts when the tapes were reviewed. Besides his dirty hands and nearly unhittable dominance, his performances were also noteworthy for his uncharacteristically being caught up in what could be described as the emotion of the moment, as he whooped and fist-pumped his way through the playoffs. While not widespread, speculations that sterroids were the culprit also were tossed about...

The same day it became known that 2005 Defensive Rookie of the Year Shawne Merriman of the San Diego Chargers tested positive for sterriods, and eventually served a four game suspension.

6 Nov markes the one year anniversary of the two Carolina Panther Cheerleaders arrested for lesbian sex in a bathroom stall.

The NHL kicks off their new ad campaign, in which Sidney Crosby, Peter Forsberg, etc, etc. Are discovered in all sorts of odd places, such as a suburban bathroom shower, a couple's bed, the back seat of a car, and a surfboard. In every case the hockey player is discovered by a man, usually clearly the husband, who then asks his wife what the player is doing there. She then nonchalantly answers that "He's just here to remind us that the NHL season's starting." The underlying message seems to be: "We know our ratings are really, really low. If you don't keep an eye on us we just may fuck all of your wives. Don't say we didn't warn you, eh?"

Almost makes me nostalgic for last season, when the NHL ads featured arenas full of fans reciting something that sounded more or less like the Apostles Creed, ending in something like, "BUT MOST OF ALL, WE BELIEVE IN HOCKEY!" It made is seem like following the NHL was akin to joining a cult, but hey--this seemed like a cult I'd be happy to join. As long as they don't make me sell flowers at airports....

But maybe this is the real deal--once you've joined the cult of the NHL, you will receive many fringe benefits, including absolution of sins (of course), and friendly reminders that the season is starting up, delivered to individual households by the players themselves, invariably to one of the family's female members. Nothing wrong with that!

Meanwhile, I've been doing well enough playing tournaments on bodog that I may be able to bet on some football this weekend, if I'm not too gun-shy from my recent losses to make some moves, that is.