VSiN Analytics College Football Report for Week 0
The following is a collection of analytical data, betting systems and strength ratings featured on VSiN and qualified for the college football games of Week 0. This report is meant to emulate the process that Steve Makinen and other members of the VSiN Analytics team go through when handicapping each week’s college football board.
Strategies using CFB DraftKings Betting Splits data
VSiN.com’s BETTING SPLITS pages are among our most touted features and a fantastic resource for bettors. We have built these pages using the data DraftKings provides to us detailing the breakdowns of the money and ticket splits for point spreads, moneylines and totals. In an article published in the 2023 College Football Betting Guide, Makinen outlined 13 systematic strategies for successfully using the DK Betting Splits Data that developed in the ’22 season. Here are the systems and qualifying plays for this week’s games as of Tuesday. These can and will change, so continue to track and qualify the systems up until kickoff for best usage.
DK Betting Splits system #1
When 80% or more of the HANDLE was on a particular side of an ATS wager, this majority group was just 40-47 ATS (46%). In other words, if you saw the big GREEN lights on the VSiN betting splits HANDLE page 80% or higher, it was best to fade it.
System matches: FADE OHIO, FADE USC
DK Betting Splits system #2
When 75%+ of the number of BETS were on a particular side of an ATS wager, this majority group was just 66-76 ATS (46.5%). Again, if you see the big GREEN lights on the VSiN betting splits # of BETS page 75% or higher, it was best to fade it.
System matches: FADE VANDERBILT, FADE USC
DK Betting Splits system #4
When the majority NUMBER of BETS was on ROAD FAVORITES for an ATS wager, this majority group was just 59-75 ATS (44.0%). Bet volume usually covers more public action, and again, recreational bettors love road favorites but don’t typically fare well long term.
System match: FADE UTEP
DK Betting Splits system #5
When the majority of the HANDLE was on ROAD UNDERDOGS for an ATS wager, this majority group was 100-82 ATS (54.9%). Now, 54.9% is less than the usual systems we like to present to readers, but this is a nice advantage against the usual majority win rates and goes to show that being on the “smart” side of majority handle can pay off. Remember, higher handle feels less “public” than higher bet counts.
System matches: PLAY UMASS, PLAY OHIO
DK Betting Splits system #9
When the majority of the HANDLE backed a team in a FBS vs. FBS game for an ATS wager but the line moved toward the OPPOSITE team, this majority group was just 38-49 ATS (43.7%). This can be a tricky one to avoid, as it can be referred to as a trap in booking circles. The theory is that the more money a team gets on it, the more likely the line moves toward that team. This is the opposite scenario, and the public usually loses.
System matches: FADE NOTRE DAME (-21 vs Navy), FADE JACKSONVILLE STATE (+1 vs UTEP), FADE VANDERBILT (-17.5 vs Hawaii)
DK Betting Splits system #10
The average college football total last year was 54.5. In games in which the totals reached 57 or higher and oddsmakers thus expected them to be a little more explosive, when majority HANDLE bettors favored the UNDER, they were relatively sharp, going 35-21 (62.5%). This is pretty rare, as it occurred in only 56 of 776 games.
System match: PLAY UNDER Florida International-Louisiana Tech (O/U at 58.5)
DK Betting Splits system #11
On games with totals of 45 or lower, 70%+ super majority HANDLE bettors siding with the UNDER were 15-8 (65.2%). Because not many public bettors embrace betting UNDERs, this didn’t produce a lot of plays, but the super handle majority were sharp.
System match: PLAY UNDER UMass-New Mexico State (O/U at 45)
DK Betting Splits system #13
On games where the HANDLE has a majority on totals and the # of BETS has the opposite majority, the majority HANDLE plays went 112-93 (54.6%). This could be described as more sharp action being displayed by the majority handle.
System matches: PLAY UNDER UTEP-Jacksonville State, PLAY UNDER UMass-New Mexico State, PLAY UNDER Hawaii-Vanderbilt, PLAY UNDER Florida International-Louisiana Tech
CFB opening week(s) concepts to consider
This material is from the VSiN piece entitled Eight college football opening week(s) concepts to consider detailing systems that only apply for Weeks 0 and 1.
CFB Week 0/1 Betting Concept #4
There is a massive swing in expectation to win and/or cover when Group of 5 teams square off with Power 5 teams in Weeks 0/1 over the last decade. As hosts, the Group of 5 teams have gone 27-15 ATS (64.3%). On the road or in neutral games, these Group of 5 teams are 70-101 ATS (40.9%) in that same span. Bet accordingly.
System matches (ROAD TEAMS): FADE SAN JOSE STATE @ USC, FADE HAWAII @ Vanderbilt
CFB Week 0/1 Betting Concept #5
FAVORITES have been far more reliable at HOME and in NEUTRAL games in the opening week(s) of college football since 2013 (164-134 ATS 55%) than on the ROAD (38-54 ATS 41.3%).
System matches: PLAY NOTRE DAME (neutral vs Navy), FADE UTEP (@ Jacksonville State), PLAY San Diego State (vs Ohio), PLAY NEW MEXICO STATE (vs UMass), PLAY VANDERBILT (vs Hawaii), PLAY USC (vs San Jose State), PLAY LOUISIANA TECH (vs Florida International)
CFB Week 0/1 Betting Concept #6
Oddsmakers are leading you to water on low-totaled games in Weeks 0/1, especially with bigger favorites, as in games with totals of 48 or less and a favorite of four points or more, UNDER the total is 25-9 (73.5%) since 2013.
System matches: PLAY UNDER in UMass-New Mexico State (O/U at 45)
CFB Week 0/1 Betting Concept #7
Non-conference games between Group of 5 opponents involving home underdogs in Weeks 0/1 have been explosive, particularly when not expected to be. In fact, since ’13, when totals on these games involving home dogs (or pick ‘ems) are 64 or less, the result has been 22 OVERs, six UNDERs (78.6%).
System matches: PLAY OVER in UTEP-Jacksonville State (O/U at 53)
CFB Week 0/1 Betting Concept #8
Non-conference games between Group of 5 opponents featuring a home favorite have been unexpectedly lower scoring, producing 30 UNDERs, 16 OVERs (65.2%) since ‘13.
System matches: PLAY UNDER in Massachusetts-New Mexico State (O/U at 45), PLAY UNDER in Ohio-San Diego State (O/U at 49)
College Football Revenge Handicapping
The following are methodologies for handicapping revenge situations in college football, including the best and worst teams in revenge mode, and the best betting systems uncovered. This material was taken from an article published in late August. REVENGE is defined by having lost a game to a specific opponent in the prior or current season only.
Best and Worst College Football Revenge Teams (since ’16)
Best
* NAVY is 12-19 SU and 20-11 ATS (65%) in revenge mode since ’16
System match: PLAY NAVY ATS (neutral vs Notre Dame)
Worst
* MASSACHUSETTS is 1-16 SU and 5-12 ATS (29%) in revenge mode since ’16
System match: FADE MASSACHUSETTS (@ New Mexico St)
College football revenge systems
Neutral-field underdogs are great in revenge games
Since the start of the 2016 season, neutral-field underdogs playing in revenge mode have gone 40-23 ATS (63.5%).
System match: PLAY NAVY ATS (neutral vs Notre Dame)
This week’s College Football Strength Ratings
The following are taken from today’s MAKINEN WEEKLY RATINGS page under the college football tab on VSiN.com. Listed by team, current line and difference between rating and current line (in parentheses).
This week’s Top 3 UNDERPRICED UNDERDOGS according to the Makinen POWER RATINGS projections:
Ratings matches: 1. JACKSONVILLE STATE +1 (+6.1), 2. SAN JOSE STATE +30.5 (+0.9), 3. HAWAII +17.5 (+0.3)
This week’s Top 3 UNDERPRICED FAVORITES according to the Makinen POWER RATINGS projections:
Ratings matches: 1. NEW MEXICO STATE -6.5 (+4.7), 2. SAN DIEGO STATE -2.5 (+2.4) 3 (tie). NOTRE DAME -21 (+0.9) and LOUISIANA TECH -11 (+0.9)
This week’s Top 3 UNDERPRICED UNDERDOGS according to the Makinen EFFECTIVE STRENGTH RATINGS projections:
Ratings matches: 1. JACKSONVILLE STATE +1 (+4.7), 2. SAN JOSE STATE +30.5 (+2.2), 3. OHIO +2.5 (+1.0)
This week’s UNDERPRICED FAVORITE according to the Makinen EFFECTIVE STRENGTH RATINGS projections:
Ratings match: VANDERBILT -17.5 (+2.2)
This week’s Top 2 BIGGEST TOTAL PROJECTIONS FAVORING OVER according to the Makinen EFFECTIVE STRENGTH RATINGS projections:
Ratings matches: 1. UMASS-NEW MEXICO STATE OVER 45 (+0.8), 2. HAWAII-VANDERBILT OVER 55.5 (+0.5)
This week’s Top 3 BIGGEST TOTAL PROJECTIONS FAVORING UNDER according to the Makinen EFFECTIVE STRENGTH RATINGS projections:
Ratings matches: 1. SAN JOSE STATE-USC UNDER 66.5 (-10.6), 2. NAVY-NOTRE DAME UNDER 50.5 (-4.0), 3. FIU-LOUISIANA TECH UNDER 58.5 (-2.0)
This week’s Top 3 UNDERPRICED UNDERDOGS according to the Makinen BETTORS RATINGS projections:
Ratings matches: 1. JACKSONVILLE STATE +1 (+6.5), 2. UMASS +6.5 (+3.2), 3. OHIO +2.5 (+1.2)
This week’s Top 3 UNDERPRICED FAVORITES according to the Makinen BETTORS RATINGS projections:
Ratings matches: 1. VANDERBILT -17.5 (+6.0), 2. NOTRE DAME -21 (+5.0), 3. USC -30.5 (+0.8)
This week’s Top 3 BIGGEST TOTAL PROJECTIONS FAVORING OVER according to the Makinen BETTORS RATINGS projections:
Ratings matches: 1. UMASS-NEW MEXICO STATE OVER 45 (+2.7), 2. OHIO-SAN DIEGO STATE OVER 49 (+1.9), 3. NAVY-NOTRE DAME OVER 50.5 (+0.5)
This week’s Top 3 BIGGEST TOTAL PROJECTIONS FAVORING UNDER according to the Makinen BETTORS RATINGS projections:
Ratings matches: 1. HAWAII-VANDERBILT UNDER 55.5 (-4.5), 2. FIU-LOUISIANA TECH UNDER 58.5 (-2.4), 3. SAN JOSE STATE-USC UNDER 66.5 (-2.1)
Top College Football Team Situational Trends
These are some of the top situational trends that have developed with teams in recent years of action (WEEK 0 PLAY):
* SAN DIEGO STATE is 33-13 (28.3%) UNDER the total since ’19
System match: PLAY UNDER in Ohio-San Diego State (O/U at 49)
