Jen and I are back from our Royal Caribbean cruise of Atlantic Maritime Canada (very Caribbean, eh?) on board the beautiful Serenade of the Seas (apparently Royal Caribbean forbids any crew member from saying the ship’s name without adding the word “beautiful” as a prefix… you know, kind of like the way you’re supposed to add “presented by Bank One” as a suffix to “the Chicago Bears”). Incidentally, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick look like Ohio with more rocks, and the locals (as well as the wife) get really pissed when you tell them as much. However, the locals get even more pissed when you ask them how they live through such cold winters (I refrained from asking them what state they lived in, which is easily the most classic Canadian-baiting question). You know, maybe it isn’t all George W. Bush’s fault that the entire world hates Americans. But I digress…
I was very pleased to come home and see that Chas had taken over my game picking duties while I was gone. However, I was somewhat sorry that I hadn’t set aside a little time earlier to show Chas how to properly write about betting lines (remember that I used to run the books for Theta Chi fraternity before Pitt justifiably kicked our sorry asses off campus). So let me give everybody a quick little primer. When Chas says…
West Virginia (-26.5) at Miami
…he means that you would have to subtract 26.5 points from West Virginia’s final score in order to make this game a fair and even bet. Or in other words, Chas is saying that the Mountaineers were 26.5 point favorites in this game. Now either this is a substantial typo, or I want to find Chas’s bookie fast, dammit.
But in any case, Chas picked Miami to cover the spread (I’m assuming that Chas meant to write “West Virginia (+26.5) at Miami”). I would have picked the Hurricanes to cover too, for pretty much the exact same reasons. We were both wrong, because we both forgot that Miami would be looking past the Mountaineers to Florida State. Nevertheless, give Rich Rodriguez and his Mountaineers a lot of credit. They had one heck of a game plan, executed it to near perfection, and deserved to win. Plus, they converted the entire “Racers Sports Bar” on board the beautiful Serenade of the Seas (in the Bay of Fundy at the time) into temporary Mountaineer fans.
When Chas writes…
Wisconsin (+1) at Penn St.
…he means that you would have to add one point to Wisconsin’s final score in order to make this game a fair and even bet. Or in other words, Chas is saying that Wisconsin was a one point underdog in Beaver Stadium. Although I never saw a line for this game (and now they’re all gone), I sincerely doubt that this was true. So I’m just going to assume that this was another typo, and that the Nittany Lions were the real underdogs here.
Chas wisely picked Wisconsin to cover this miniscule spread, and I would have too. However, the Wisconsin Badgers aren’t the only Big Ten team that is getting stronger. Penn State had a legitimate chance to win this one, but blundered it away with a series of ball-handling errors. Incidentally, as Jen and I were driving home from Harrisburg to State College last night, we tuned in the Nittany Lion Post Game 2003 show with Jeff Byers and Phil Grosz (editor of Blue White Illustrated) on WRSC, State College. And it was heartwrenching. I mean, these guys and their callers (and my wife, for that matter) were depressed, despondent, desperate, and genuinely suffering. It was all so pathetic that I… once again… began to… (gulp)… actually experience feelings of pity for the Nittany Lion Nation…
…I’m weak, guys… I may need some emotional support again this Saturday (generally, Shawn just reminds me how arrogant the Lion fans were when they we’re regularly kicking our asses in the 1990s, and I feel better).
Chas writes…
Michigan (+3) at Iowa.
…but I suspect he meant to write “Michigan (-3) at Iowa” (i.e., I believe that the Hawkeyes were the underdogs here). Chas took the Wolverines to cover, as I would have. But we both forgot that nobody consistently underachieves like the University of Michigan (except for possibly Ohio State).
Chas writes…
Washington (+1.5) at UCLA
…by which he means God knows what, since I have no idea who should have been favored in this game and Chas has consistently screwed up his spreads. However, Chas did pick Washington to win (I wouldn’t have picked this game either way, since I’m relatively unfamiliar with the PAC-10), and UCLA stomped the Huskies 46-16 (which pretty much makes the matter of interpreting Chas’s spread irrelevant).
Chas writes…
Illinois (-14) at Purdue
This means that Purdue was a 14 point underdog at home against a pitiful Illinois team. Once again, I think Chas wrote this up backwards. But I think he understood what he was talking about anyways when when he took Illinois and the points (I mean, he at least knew that Illinois was the real underdog… even if he didn’t write it that way). Nevertheless, Purdue steamrolled Illinois 43-10 — easily covering the spread. Chalk up another loss for team PSB.
Chas writes…
USC (+12) at Arizona St.
…but I’m pretty sure that he meant to write “USC (-12) at Arizona State” (the Trojans were favored here, right?). Chas picked USC to cover, which they did.
Chas writes…
Oregon St. (+1) at California.
…by which — once again — he means God knows what, since I have no idea who should have been favored in this game and Chas has consistently screwed up his spreads. However, Chas picked the other OSU to win, and they easily did.
Alas, Chas went 3-4 for the week. It’s not easy, is it? In any case, I’ll put my substantially better 9-9 record (like I have a lot of room to run smack here) back on the line next week again. Chas (or Pat, John, Harlan, or Shawn… feel free to kick in any time guys) is more than welcome to join me.
But for any newcomers, USA Today provides an excellent guide to reading (and writing) betting lines here under “Odds primer.” Example: “The favorite is always indicated by a minus sign (e.g. -5.5) and the underdog by a plus sign (e.g.+5.5).”
Incidentally, Chas’s post on why a megaconference would suck should be required reading for any Pitt fan.
Hail to Being Home Again… for some reason, I’m always more relaxed here
