VSiN Analytics College Football Report for Week 7

By
VSiN Staff
-
1447
 

 

 

***Top College Football Betting Resources***

*It's the VSiN Black Friday Special. Take advantage of the largest savings of the year by upgrading to VSiN Pro. For a limited time, you can secure Pro access until May 1st for only $60.*

VSiN Analytics College Football Report for Week 7

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 7. This report is meant to emulate the process that Steve Makinen and other members of the VSiN Analytics team undergo when handicapping each week’s college football board.

Strategies using CFB DraftKings Betting Splits data

One of the most touted features on the VSiN.com website, and a feature that we believe to be a fantastic resource for bettors is the Betting Splits pages. These are the pages that we have built utilizing the data that DraftKings so graciously provides to us detailing the breakdowns of the money & ticket splits for point spreads, money lines, and totals. In an article published in the 2023 College Football Betting Guide, Steve Makinen outlined 13 different 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 (records are shown heading into the 2023 season). These can AND WILL change, so continue to track and qualify the systems up until kickoff for best usage. There will be an updated betting splits article on Saturday morning.

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 ALL): LIBERTY, FIU, KENT STATE, OHIO STATE, TOLEDO, CHARLOTTE, UTAH, SOUTH CAROLINA, SOUTH FLORIDA, UNLV, NEW MEXICO, TEXAS STATE, KENTUCKY, NORTH CAROLINA, DUKE, UTSA, COLORADO STATE, SAN DIEGO STATE

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 ALL): APPALACHIAN STATE, WEST VIRGINIA, FRESNO STATE, COLORADO, FLORIDA STATE, OHIO STATE, RUTGERS, GEORGIA, BUFFALO, MARYLAND, KANSAS, SOUTH FLORIDA, WAKE FOREST, MIAMI (OH), OHIO, UNLV, KENTUCKY, NORTH CAROLINA, DUKE, COLORADO STATE, SAN DIEGO STATE

DK Betting Splits system #3: When the majority of the handle was on road favorites for an ATS wager, this majority group was just 58-85 ATS (40.6%). More recreational bettors love road favorites because they are usually the better team. The point spread is the great equalizer.

System Matches (FADE ALL): LIBERTY, SMU, FRESNO STATE, OHIO STATE, GEORGIA, TOLEDO, KANSAS, MIAMI (OH), OHIO, UNLV, LOUISVILLE, SAN DIEGO STATE

DK Betting Splits system #4: Similarly to #3 above, 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 Matches (FADE ALL): LIBERTY, WEST VIRGINIA, SMU, TULANE, FRESNO STATE, OHIO STATE, GEORGIA, TOLEDO, TROY, KANSAS, MIAMI (OH), OHIO, UNLV, SAN JOSE STATE, LOUISVILLE, SAN DIEGO STATE

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 I 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 the majority handle can pay off. Remember, a higher handle feels less “public” than higher bet counts.

System Matches (SLIGHT PLAY ALL): LOUISIANA TECH, SAM HOUSTON STATE, IOWA STATE, KENT STATE, INDIANA, TEMPLE, BOWLING GREEN, AKRON, UMASS, BYU, TEXAS A&M, WAKE FOREST, IOWA, WYOMING, AUBURN, USC, UCLA

DK Betting Splits system #6: When the majority number of bets was on road underdogs for an ATS wager, this majority group was 98-75 ATS (56.6%). This is even better than the handle numbers in #5 actually and suggests that following public bettors getting behind road dogs can be an actionable strategy.

System Matches (PLAY ALL): LOUISIANA TECH, UMASS, BYU, WAKE FOREST, OREGON, IOWA, WYOMING, AUBURN, MARSHALL, USC, UAB

DK Betting Splits system #7: When the majority of the number of bets backed a team in an ATS wager in non-Saturday games, their 2022 season record was 72-46 (61%)! This goes to show that public bettors can be better performers with fewer games to choose from. A lot of times their mistake proves to be taking too many games on a Saturday.

System Matches (PLAY ALL): LOUISIANA TECH, APPALACHIAN STATE, LIBERTY, FIU, NEW MEXICO STATE, WEST VIRGINIA, SMU, TULANE, FRESNO STATE, COLORADO

DK Betting Splits system #8:  When the majority of the handle backed the team with more season wins in an FBS vs. FBS contest for an ATS wager, this majority group was just 100-131 ATS (43.3%). More than not, bettors like to back the “better team” in a matchup, regardless of what the point spread indicates. Again, the point spread is the eternal equalizer.

System Matches (FADE ALL): LOUISIANA TECH, APPALACHIAN STATE, FIU, SMU, FRESNO STATE, COLORADO, GEORGIA, OHIO STATE, FLORIDA STATE, ALABAMA, RUTGERS, JAMES MADISON, TOLEDO, UTAH, KANSAS, MARYLAND, WAKE FOREST, BYU, MIAMI (OH), OHIO, UNLV, NEW MEXICO, LOUISVILLE, WASHINGTON STATE, TEXAS STATE, USC, NORTH CAROLINA

DK Betting Splits system #9: When the majority of the handle backed a team in an FBS vs. FBS contest for an ATS wager, but the line moved towards the opposite team, this majority group was just 38-49 ATS (43.7%). This an 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 usually, the public loses.

System Matches (FADE ALL): LOUISIANA TECH, FIU, MEMPHIS, FRESNO STATE, COLORADO, FLORIDA STATE, IOWA STATE, OHIO STATE, GEORGIA, BYU, MIAMI (OH), WAKE FOREST, ARMY, BOWLING GREEN, IOWA, OHIO, LOUISVILLE, WASHINGTON STATE, WYOMING, KENTUCKY

DK Betting Splits system #10: The average college football total last year was 54.5. In games where the totals reached 57 or higher and oddsmakers thus expected them to be a little more explosive, when the 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 Matches (PLAY UNDER): FRESNO STATE-UTAH STATE, TEMPLE-N TEXAS, FL ATLANTIC-USF, AUBURN-LSU, ARIZONA-WASH STATE, ULM-TX STATE, MARSHALL-GA STATE, USC-NOTRE DAME, BOISE STATE-COLORADO STATE

DK Betting Splits system #11: On games with totals of 45 or lower, 70%+ super majority handle bettors siding with the Under was 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 Matches (PLAY UNDER): KENT STATE-EMU, NAVY-CHARLOTTE, AKRON-C MICHIGAN, WYOMING-AIR FORCE

DK Betting Splits system #12: On games with totals of 45 or lower, 75%+ super majority number of bets bettors bucking the low total and siding with the Over were 22-13 (62.9%). Again, not a ton of plays here but the more public option of the number of bets was pretty good when going against the grain.

System Matches (PLAY OVER): UTEP-FIU, SAM HOUSTON STATE-NMSU, MICH STATE-RUTGERS, TROY-ARMY, OHIO-NIU

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 when opposite majorities and HANDLE favors UNDER

PLAY OVER when opposite majorities and HANDLE favors OVER

 

College Football Revenge Handicapping

The following are methodologies for handicapping revenge situations in college football, including the best & 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 & Worst College Football Revenge Teams (since 2016)

Best

* WISCONSIN is 9-4 SU and ATS (69.2%) in revenge mode since 2016

System Match: PLAY WISCONSIN ATS (-9.5 vs Iowa)

* KENT ST is 9-15 SU and 16-8 ATS (66.7%) in revenge mode since 2016

System Match: PLAY KENT ST ATS (+10.5 at Eastern Michigan)

Worst

* APPALACHIAN STATE is 3-4 SU & 2-5 ATS (28.6%) in revenge mode since ’16

System Match: FADE APPALACHIAN ST (-6 vs Coastal Carolina)

College football revenge systems

Home/Road revenge line range angles that have thrived

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR