Tweet
Not sure how this pans out over the years, but here's some tasty numbers from last season for College Football Totals. Discovered this doing some research last week. It is a system for UNDERS in College Football.
Here is a look at teams that rushed for 200> yards in their last game AND passed for 200> yards in that same game.
These teams went UNDER the total their next game 94 out of 162 times. The record of 94-68 is 58.02%, not bad considering the number of plays.
Now some teams AVERAGE 200> yards rushing anyway. Here's the breakdown of that 94-68 record:
Teams that were AVERAGING 200> rushing yards at the time of the proposed UNDER play: 36-40 UNDER
Teams that were AVERAGING <200 rushing yards at the time of the proposed UNDER play: 58-28 UNDER, or 67.44%.
Here's a breakdown of that 58-28 record according to conference:
ACC: 6-2
BIG EAST 5-2
BIG TEN 11-4
BIG TWELVE: 3-2
C-USA: 6-4
IND.: 1-1
MAC: 6-1
MWC: 4-6
PAC TEN: 3-2
SEC: 6-1
SUN BELT: 3-0
WAC: 4-3
An astute observer will notice that the three primarily West Coast conferences were less successful playing the UNDER. The Pac Ten, MWC, and WAC were a combined 11-11. The remaining conferences were 47-17 UNDER, or 73.44%.
What if the team met the criteria two weeks back to back? That is, they rushed for 200> yards in each of their last two games and passed for 200> yards in each of those same two games. In that situaton they were 7-0 UNDER. If you wanted to play those games as double plays, you would in effect have a 54-17 record (47-17 + 7-0).
As a sidenote, although the West Coast conferences had a 11-11 record, four of those games were double plays and went 3-1, for what it is worth. But that is only one game away from 2-2, so I wouldn't be crazy about going UNDER on the West Coast even if it were a double play.
gl,
dave
Here is a look at teams that rushed for 200> yards in their last game AND passed for 200> yards in that same game.
These teams went UNDER the total their next game 94 out of 162 times. The record of 94-68 is 58.02%, not bad considering the number of plays.
Now some teams AVERAGE 200> yards rushing anyway. Here's the breakdown of that 94-68 record:
Teams that were AVERAGING 200> rushing yards at the time of the proposed UNDER play: 36-40 UNDER
Teams that were AVERAGING <200 rushing yards at the time of the proposed UNDER play: 58-28 UNDER, or 67.44%.
Here's a breakdown of that 58-28 record according to conference:
ACC: 6-2
BIG EAST 5-2
BIG TEN 11-4
BIG TWELVE: 3-2
C-USA: 6-4
IND.: 1-1
MAC: 6-1
MWC: 4-6
PAC TEN: 3-2
SEC: 6-1
SUN BELT: 3-0
WAC: 4-3
An astute observer will notice that the three primarily West Coast conferences were less successful playing the UNDER. The Pac Ten, MWC, and WAC were a combined 11-11. The remaining conferences were 47-17 UNDER, or 73.44%.
What if the team met the criteria two weeks back to back? That is, they rushed for 200> yards in each of their last two games and passed for 200> yards in each of those same two games. In that situaton they were 7-0 UNDER. If you wanted to play those games as double plays, you would in effect have a 54-17 record (47-17 + 7-0).
As a sidenote, although the West Coast conferences had a 11-11 record, four of those games were double plays and went 3-1, for what it is worth. But that is only one game away from 2-2, so I wouldn't be crazy about going UNDER on the West Coast even if it were a double play.
gl,
dave
Comment