I think by now we all know you cannot presume what happened in one game necessarily means anything in the next, or that you can get too far comparing common opponents. Last year UCLA shut out Stanford while the tree scored what, 28 in the first half v USC and barely lost? Didnt exactly mean a UCLA pounding of USC, although with 4 losses they then play a game v USC that could have gone either way and cover a huge spread losing by only 5. Is there any doubt that USC was dominant last year and UCLA is better than last year, yet you already decidein a rivalry game USC wins by 3 TDs more than last year? May well happen, but the logic is flawed.
AM beat Okie State by 40. Okie State had Texas down 19. You gonna load up on AM v Texas on the money line? Everyone is now drooling over Miami - the same Canes team that didnt even score as much on Florida State as every single other team FSU has played this year - including the Citadel. You gonna bet NCState outright v Miami if they played, since look at the performance against common opponent FSU? Stanford pounded the same Arizona State team that USC barely beat in a big come from behind win. Could really tell that comparison last Saturday huh? Northestern won in East Lansing by what, 35? So you gonna lay 30+ with Northwestern at Notre Dame in that hypothetical mathup?
Usually I find the best betting opportunities are when you see a line overreact to one game. Had some big winning examples this year - Iowa State over Iowa, Army over Iowa State and Michigan over Michigan State immediately come to mind this year.
