Here’s the link.
Tennessee +4.5
Revenge this, revenge that. Cal couldn’t compete with the big boys from the SEC last year. Don’t be fooled by the 345-18 final score of that whipping – it was 35-3 after three quarters, complete and utter domination. I’m not convinced that things are going to be much better for the Bears this time around. The Bears are just 4-6 ATS as a home favorite over the last two years. Their defense was susceptible to power rushing games all year – Washington, UCLA, Texas A+M and yes, these same Volunteers all enjoyed success on the ground against their vulnerable front seven. The front seven looks worse, not better, heading into 2007, and they lost their best cornerback to the NFL (Daymeion Hughes), leaving a redshirt frosh his projected replacement.
Tennessee has a senior quarterback in Erik Ainge. They went 4-1 on the road last year, and have road wins over LSU, Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, Alabama and Miami-FL over the last few seasons; 8-3 ATS in their last eleven tries as underdogs. While I’ve had my share of concerns about Phil Fulmer’s coaching acumen in recent seasons, the talent level in Knoxville hasn’t dropped off one iota. A good (not great) team from the SEC shouldn’t be catching this many points against a good (not great) team from the PAC-10 – there is a class difference between these two conferences for every team except USC. Let’s not forget that Fulmer gets his team prepared – Tennessee has won twelve consecutive openers. First Lean: Tennessee +
6 comments:
"...Their defense was susceptible to power rushing games all year – Washington, UCLA, Texas A+M..."
Ummm, didn't Cal win all those games, two of them handily?
ya, sounds like a real homer post!
Go Bears!
good point
Yeah, that was a horrible analysis. I'm not confident that the Bears will win this one (here's hoping), but that argument was just crud:
1. Texas A&M couldn't run the ball against Cal to save it's life.
2. ATS numbers that include a heavily favored team are meaningless for games where the teams are near even ATS. (who cares if Cal only beat UCLA by 14 instead of whatever the spread was)
3. Using anything from 2005 (like ATS numbers for the last two years) is ridiculous. Everyone knows that 2005 was a horrible year for the Bears.
4. How many times are we going to hear that the SEC is miles stronger than the Pac-10 without evidence? How about this evidence, the Pac-10 is 8-6 against the SEC since 2000.
All great points Ken. The only thing that strikes fear into me about this article is that this guy is a Vegas sports handicapper. Though his biased sounding assertions about the SEC are as thoughtless as all others, I'm still nervous about this one. The crowd needs to help'em with this one.
All in all, the best medicine for the nation's anti-Pac-10 perception is for other teams in the conference to win some big games. If we had gone into Knoxville last season and beaten the Volunteers, Oregon State finished off Boise State after taking a 14-0 lead, and UCLA holds on at South Bend - I think many of the stories this season would be more along the lines of "Look who's challenging the SEC this year - and its not who you think" type stories talking up the Pac-10 and their chances for 2 BCS teams.
If Cal can return the favor vs. Tennessee, UCLA hold homefield against the Irish, and either Oregon or Washington pull off the upset of Michigan or Ohio State - we will see much more late season discussion of the 2nd place Pac-10 team (hopefully that would be USC) deserving of a 2nd BCS bid - and maybe even a rehash of whether 11-1 USC should get another shot at 12-0 Cal in the title game!
(okay, that last one may be asking too much - but it's August and the clock ticks way too slow this time of the year!)
Post a Comment