Tweet
UT-San Antonio -3
Alabama St. is coming from a very weak SWAC conference. Their non-conference schedule included a 13 point loss to Belmont, 20+ losses to Loyola-Chicago and Iowa State, and 14 point loss to Creighton. Their RPI is 263 with SOS 333 Wyoming's RPI was 264
UTSA's non-conference schedule had three true cupcakes, schools I have never heard of. They did beat Houston, Pepperdine, San Jose St. Their RPI is 193 with SOS 298 Indiana's RPI was 191
I am going to take the better shooting team (FG% 42.9% v 39.7%; 3PT FG% 36.3% v 29.2%; FT% 72.0% v 60.8%)
Plus, I am using the old football handicapping mentality, if you can pick the SU winner, you also picked the ATS winner.
Generally, if teams in the play in game win they cover (yes, this does include the dogs winning and automatically covering): Only once did the winning team not cover, and that was in 2007 with the favorite not covering by the hook. Yesterday, UNC-Asheville pushed and Clemson won and covered. I see UTSA winning and therefore covering.
Alabama St. is coming from a very weak SWAC conference. Their non-conference schedule included a 13 point loss to Belmont, 20+ losses to Loyola-Chicago and Iowa State, and 14 point loss to Creighton. Their RPI is 263 with SOS 333 Wyoming's RPI was 264
UTSA's non-conference schedule had three true cupcakes, schools I have never heard of. They did beat Houston, Pepperdine, San Jose St. Their RPI is 193 with SOS 298 Indiana's RPI was 191
I am going to take the better shooting team (FG% 42.9% v 39.7%; 3PT FG% 36.3% v 29.2%; FT% 72.0% v 60.8%)
Plus, I am using the old football handicapping mentality, if you can pick the SU winner, you also picked the ATS winner.
Generally, if teams in the play in game win they cover (yes, this does include the dogs winning and automatically covering): Only once did the winning team not cover, and that was in 2007 with the favorite not covering by the hook. Yesterday, UNC-Asheville pushed and Clemson won and covered. I see UTSA winning and therefore covering.
Comment