Hey, I come hear during football season. Lots of really fantastic posts about if Hank Browns pass would have gone for a td. Stimulating. Would like to skip that crap and see who you all think has the best inside info on this board about program. Or is everybody pretty much in the dark and just speculating? Zero interest in paying for more speculation as I have found the Iowa reporters have zero info. Are those dumbshits Miller, Howe, Hardy still in the mix?
What poster has the best inside info?
- Thread starter TheOven
- Start date
LOL, no one on this board has inside info.
More importantly, Did you know that Lester said it would have been a td though
More importantly, Did you know that Lester said it would have been a td though
Diaz has kept up his stellar play during camp. Look for him to put up some numbers this year if he can stay healthy.
Weiskopf has moved up the board on D. I'll be interested if we go more 4-3 this year because of the lack of experience on the DL....seems like we might be leaning that way....especially as more teams start going with more TE packages.
Cael Winter has been the starting C for most of the practices, although he has been trading off at times with Pieper and then Myslinski gets the start at RG. I think the coaches will ultimately settle on Winter as the starting C because the line is better with him at C and Pieper at RG than it is with Pieper at C and Myslinski at RG.
The reps have been pretty even so far at QB between Hank and Heck. Sounds like Heck has gotten just a little bit more work at 1 than Hank, but it's close. I would anticipate Heck starting at Kids Day, but it may also be based on rotation and whose day it is on Sat.
That's all I got so far.
Weiskopf has moved up the board on D. I'll be interested if we go more 4-3 this year because of the lack of experience on the DL....seems like we might be leaning that way....especially as more teams start going with more TE packages.
Cael Winter has been the starting C for most of the practices, although he has been trading off at times with Pieper and then Myslinski gets the start at RG. I think the coaches will ultimately settle on Winter as the starting C because the line is better with him at C and Pieper at RG than it is with Pieper at C and Myslinski at RG.
The reps have been pretty even so far at QB between Hank and Heck. Sounds like Heck has gotten just a little bit more work at 1 than Hank, but it's close. I would anticipate Heck starting at Kids Day, but it may also be based on rotation and whose day it is on Sat.
That's all I got so far.
we do have a few assets placed inside kirk’s supposed fortress and info is disseminated here but for obvious reasons will remain accessible only to those of us w a codebook
Eyes. He is obviously a member of the Ferentz clan. Not so great on betting advice, though.
No actual inside info. Occasionally someone who has a friend who knows someone posts something that ends up being true. I have a family member that’s a coach at a high level high school that sends a kid or 2 D1 every year. Sometimes that’s Iowa sometimes it’s not. I get a tidbit from him every once in a while, but you could hardly call it inside access.
I’m sure there are other people here who have some distant connections like that who pick up tidbits here and there. But mostly this is just a place where fans BS around.
Actually, my sportsbetting advice on here over the years has been very accurate
Might want to look at Oklahoma win total, I saw 7.5 somewhere. Looks like a lock for the over. Mateer was the best qb in the country before he broke his hand last year.
Yeah that smart bet on the Rutgers bowl game was epic
Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised at all if Winter starts against Northern Illinois.
Oh man! Prepare yourself for ten paragraphs documenting why that is the case.So you bet Rutgers, lost, wished it would have cashed, and call it a good bet.
Hawkisoaker. He is 100% accurate after the fact.
Only if the hammer is indeed dropped! Who was the poster who was always posting star ratings, 40 times, etc, etc non stop?
Another name I heard on a pod that is ascending is WR Brody Shaffer (sp). Staff feels very good about him and stole him out of Wisky and has had a good summer and fall. Maybe not this year but is making strides.
Legendary idiot Kilroy. He's actually been replaced as the worst ever.
Eyes don’t need your help. He’s a top 1%er in the sports wagering world. If you don’t believe me, just ask him.
I had inside info for about two years but never shared any of it here. well...just some very vague stuff. Social media is ruthless and sometimes it felt unfair to the kids involved. it was just another connected person's opinion.
Had Rutgers to win at +220, as I recall.So you bet Rutgers, lost, wished it would have cashed, and call it a good bet.
Rutgers ended up losing a close one, after having a nice lead.
Considering Rutgers didn't even have to win 1 out of 3 times to profit, I believed the bet to have a winning edge in the long run, going into the game. And based on the way the game played out, I'm even more confident that +220 had a long term edge.
Plenty happy with that bet
“long term edge” hahahahaha
Try to get your money back based on the “long term edge” lol
Yeah. Like punting 10 times per game is a "long term edge". Complementary football, dontcha know?
WTF do you mean by “long term edge”? How many times did you think they were going to play that game?
A football game is 60 min.
41-44
Glad you’re happy that you lost, after going out of your way to come here and start your own premature “flex thread.” The fallout was fabulous. Just own it.
Yes, a game is 60 minutes.
But that 60 minute game won't play out the same way every time. If a computer were to run thousands of simulations of the game, each iteration would carry a different game-path.
To handicap a money line bet to have a long term edge, the bettor appraises his team to win often enough to be profitable vs the paid out odds.
Pretty simple. Serious players will only bet games that they feel contain a long term edge.
That's all a bettor can do, is get his money in "good". Sometimes the game will go his way. Sometimes not.
Given a standardized bet size, and enough volume of bets to neutralize variance, a bettor that gets his money in mostly "good" (including vs juice), will be a profitable bettor. Whereas, mostly getting money in bad (juice included), will result in a losing bettor
How'd you do the all the following games those two teams played at the same location with the same rosters ?
That's a lot of words to say you were wrong. You really can't take a loss without adding in something to try and spin it as if you are right. Have you volunteered for any psychological case studies?
Could certainly be an asset to furthering our understanding of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
For those don't know what that is, here's the literal definition..
"the tendency for people who have little ability in, or knowledge of, a particular task or subject to overestimate their knowledge or ability in this area, while those who are highly skilled or knowledgeable may tend to underestimate theirs"
Clearly you don't have much experience with what you're talking about.
Because you couldn't be more fundamentally wrong.
Why would anyone ever bet an underdog on the moneyline, by your logic?
You understand that each time a bettor makes a +220 bet, he is expecting to lose that individual bet, correct?
But if he gives his team over a roughly 30% chance to win, he understands that will perform well enough vs the payout, for his bet to be profitable over time.
Have you volunteered for any psychological testing, given you infer as much for others when their thoughts differ from yours, in subject matters that you know little about?
How many times did Rutgers play that specific game? Simple question. I'm not asking for an essay about betting and no one else in this thread is either. They mentioned one game. Not a betting strategy over a period of time. A bet cannot be profitable over time when it is a one time bet that is lost. Why can you not admit you were wrong? Please give me a 4 to 5 paragraph reply on tangential ideas that still refuse to answer the question. Or tell me to read better. You do you.
I could answer this question several ways. But for the sake of the simplicity that you obviously need, the post you just responded to, described nothing other than the approach to bet that one, specific game
So what do you have to say about the bettors who put money on Kansas State and won that bet? Are they just stupid and lucky, unlike the brilliant, astute sports gambler that you are, who lost?
Always remember, never listen to a retard when betting. Anyone else remember that thread on the old site where eyes got destroyed for saying he still won despite his bet being a losing one? Good times.
Latest
-
01
Hawkeye Report
Iowa Football Camp Question: Defensive Line
-
02
Rivals
2027 Rivals150: 6 prospects poised to make major jumps in next rankings update
-
03
On3
2027 Bracketology: Latest way-too-early NCAA Tournament projections after 5-for-5 decisions
-
04
Hawkeye Report
FALL CAMP SPECIAL: Get 75% off subscription to Hawkeye Report
-
05
Hawkeye Report
Pieper named AP Preseason All American