College Football Sharp Money Report: Saturday, September 12

Sep 10, 2015


Throughout the course of the 2015-2016 football season, I will provide a weekly Sharp Money Report to highlight the games that are getting a lot of attention from professional bettors (i.e. sharps).  The Report will also include football games that are receiving lopsided action from the betting public (i.e. squares).  Please find below our first Sharp Money Report covering the college football games on Saturday, September 12:

College Football Teams Receiving Significant Professional Betting Action:

  • Rotation #304: Connecticut (-7.5/-8)
  • Rotation #346: Michigan (-16.5/-17)
  • Rotation #338: Arkansas State (+10.5/+11)
  • Rotation #358: California (-13.5/-14)
  • Rotation #330: Ohio (+3)
  • Rotation #376: SMU (-5.5)
  • Rotation #369: Bowling Green (+7.5)
  • Rotation #373: Kentucky (+7.5)
  • Rotation #397: Tulsa (+4)

Of course, the professional bettors got the best of the numbers in the above-referenced games, which is what distinguishes pros from the betting public.  For example, the sharps grabbed Connecticut at -6.5, SMU at -3.5 and Tulsa at +6.  The squares will likely chase the steam and settle for less desirable numbers that no longer carry value.

College Football Teams Receiving Significant Public Betting Action:

  • Rotation #312: Penn State (-21)
  • Rotation #336: Clemson (-17.5/-18)
  • Rotation #332: Ohio State (-41)
  • Rotation #396: USC (-43)
  • Rotation #400: Stanford (-19)

The betting public’s knee-jerk reaction is to bet on certain teams off an upset loss like Penn State and Stanford above.  However, that reaction is misplaced in that college football teams that lose in Game One after appearing in the postseason the previous year are just 128-140-4 ATS in Game Two since 1990.

When these former bowl squads are installed as favorites in Game Two, they fall to a disappointing 78-86-2 ATS.  If the Game One defeat was an upset, these deflated favorites are a money-burning 37-51 ATS.  Empirical evidence suggests that college football teams off a season-opening loss are not good investments, provided they appeared in a bowl game the prior year.