We had a very strong week 6, going 5-1 on our Recommended Plays, including correctly calling for ULL to win Straight Up as a TD dog! We are now 28-18-1 (61%) on our Recommended Plays this year, which brings our lifetime record 320-203-10 (61%). We are really excited about the accuracy of our analysis the last couple weeks as we’ve only been off on about one game per week, despite a card that has averaged about 8 recommended plays per week.
This is the time of the season where we seem to hit our stride as our analysis has hit its peak accuracy, but the consensus is still struggling to determine over-valued from under-valued teams.
As always, TheGeekSheet likes to recap our games and discuss what went right and what went wrong. We may not be perfect, but we ARE transparent. You can validate ALL of our College Football Plays at Cappers Watchdog (Link just to right the side of this page). Now let’s get to the analysis.
Temple (-9) at Ball State (Temple was a #3 Recommended Play)
GSS Projected Score: Temple 32 Ball State 16
(Actual: Temple 42 Ball State 0) Win
Very solid win, and pretty dialed in on the actual production as well (projected 284 @ 4.3yppl for Ball State compared to 236 @ 4.0yppl and projected 414 @ 6.3yppl for Temple compared to an actual of 6.8 yppl with 510yds).
East Carolina (+10) @ Houston (Houston was a #3 Recommended Play)
GSS Projected Score: Houston 45 ECU 29
(Actual: Houston 56 ECU 3) WIN
Very solid win, and was really dialed in on Houston production (we projected 559 @ 7.3 for Houston compared to 572 @ 6.7). The Houston D really shut down ECU (3.8yppl compared to our projections of 5.5yppl), but we certainly won’t complain about being more conservative on our projections.
Florida (+13) @ LSU (Florida was a #4 Recommended Play)
GSS Projected Score: UF 19 LSU 24
(Actual: UF 11 LSU 41) Loss
This was clearly our worst call of the week, as we were dead wrong on UF’s ability to stop LSU’s O, and more particularly we were dead wrong on the containment of the poor UF offense to the UF D. The outcome clearly proved our thesis wrong, but after reviewing the facts at hand when we made the decision, I still think it was the right decision…wrong to be sure, but don’t think we missed anything we should have seen.
Washington State (+3.5) @ UCLA (WSU was a #3 Recommended Play)
GSS Projected Score: WSU 35 UCLA 30
(Actual: WSU 25 UCLA 28) WIN
The score actually makes this look closer than it actual was, as WSU was up 22-14 midway through the 4th quarter, which included three 1st half FGs by WSU when deep in the redzone (so it conceivably should have been much more). UCLA scored the go ahead TD with two minutes to go in the game (down 25-20). Interestingly, if WSU could have converted just half of their 4 FGs into TDs we would have nailed the score (would have been 33-28 WSU vs 28-25 UCLA)…would of, could of, should of…I know, but to the point we were dead on in the analysis and a very solid win, despite some of the last minute UCLA heroics.
Troy (-6.5) @ ULL (ULL was a #1 Recommended Play)
GSS Projected Score: ULL 35 Troy 30
(Actual Score: ULL 31 Troy 17) WIN
This was one of the strongest games we’ve seen in a while, and called for the SU win, including recommending our customers take the ML. We nailed pretty much every component of this game, calling for 397 @ 5.5yppl for ULL (actual of 382 @ 5.3yppl) and projecting 432 @ 5.5yppl for Troy (actual of 402 @ 4.9yppl). The game was actually closer than the score indicated (from production perspective), but right in line with what we expected. Troy had a fumble and a TO on downs in scoring territory, which had they converted would have put near dead on the score (give them 10 or so points and the actual would have been 31-27 vs our 35-30 projection).
Arkansas State (-2) at ULM (ASU was a #3 Recommended Play)
GSS Projected Score: ASU 31 ULM 20
(Actual Score: ASU 24 ULM 19) WIN
This went pretty well according to plan, as we had a 392/335 yardage type game (actual of 345/367), and ASU was up 24-13 with 3 minutes to go in the game (ULM got a late garbage TD when the game was out of reach) and 109 of ULM’s 392 yards was on the final two possessions so the projected advantage for ASU was pretty accurate. There were 8 combined TOs, but very evenly distributed (3 INTs & 1 fumble for both ASU and ULM) and the scoring implication about the same (one clear TO for each team effectively erased points and none of the others were in a position on the field that effectively created points for the other team). At the end of the day a very solid call, with the outcome pretty consistent with what we projected.
We are dialed in. Since our models switched from utilizing previous season data after Week 4, we have gone 5-3 and 5-1 ATS (Check CAPPERS WATCHDOG for results) which is 71% ATS these past 2 weeks. We are REALLY excited about our model and we can’t wait til this set of games this weekend.
As the season progresses, lines WILL get tighter. Don’t miss this opportunity to maximize your winning by staying AHEAD of Vegas. The Geek is about to tear it up in the coming weeks so SIGN UP NOW!
~The Geek













