Most Popular Posts of All Time

Sunday, October 30, 2016

College Football Game Prediction RESULTS for Week 9 2016 FBS by SportPundit

College Football Game Prediction RESULTS for Week 9 2016 FBS by SportPundit

In Week 9, our results were:
37-18 in picking the winner
18-34-2 against the spread
22-30 against the CFPT prediction average, and
29-25 against the over/under.


After Week 9 our cumulative season results are:
425-143 in picking the winner
256-281-23 against the spread
211-250 against the CFPT average, and
288-253-15 against the over/under.

Notice as of this week: This season, our cumulative over/under results are opposite our results against the spread. Normally, that should not be. We use the same system for both, so something needs to be changed. We have examined the data and determined that our own spread has too often been too high based on our equation of .1 of our rating points as equatable with 1 point on the scoreboard. We scaled that back this week to ca. .1 rating point =  only about .7 scoreboard points, so that 1 rating point = 1 touchdown. In other words, if a team rated at +1.0 met a team rated at -2.0 under our system, that is a difference of 30 x .1 rating points or 3 full rating points which we have thus far equated as 30 scoreboard points -- which has proven to be too many. Under the revised system, our prediction would now be calculated as 21 points, i.e. 3 TDs, rather than 30 scoreboard points, and we may or may not adjust for home field advantage, as the case may be. Our over/under predictions for total score as based on yards per play do not change much. We will make subjective adjustments.
__________

Below are our -- SportPundit -- prediction RESULTS for NCAA Division I FBS College Football in ESPN Week 9, based primarily on our After Week 8 College Football Rankings and Ratings for FBS 2016-2017 by SportPundit. We also look at the USA Today Sagarin College Football 2016 Ratings, the Massey Ratings for 2016 NCAA I Football and the Dr. Kambour home field advantage calculations.

Our system is based on net average yards per play stats, calibrated primarily by adjusting for schedule difficulty, i.e. the teams thus far played. Other adjustments are also made (*=adjustment) because the ypp system is not perfect, often exacerbating stats made against much weaker or much stronger teams, nor can schedule difficulty always be pinpointed with accuracy since many schedules include FCS teams. We take the cumulative yards per play stat data from cfbstats.com and from the college and university football athletic pages online.

Caveat emptor (Buyer beware): We make this material available in good fun out of interest for the sport of college football. Please do not rely on our material to place bets or wagers of any kind. No one knows the exact outcome of a game or a season before it is played and that is what makes it so interesting. We disclaim any and all liability for the consequences of anyone relying in any way upon our postings, analysis, links or reasoning - for which we make no warranty of accuracy. May the best team win.

This week we took the opening lines (if available) and the CFPT prediction average from the CFPT (College Football Prediction Tracker), as posted on Monday, October 24, 2016 : 10:18 AM. We take the -- usually later-posted -- opening over/under from Oddsshark viz. VegasInsider.com as well as later-posted opening odds. All odds and stats are here by us posted WITHOUT ANY guarantee of accuracy, and without any liability on our part for our posted materials or links to 3rd party sites. We do our predictions for fun. If important for the reader, the reader must consult the original sites. We use the opening line ("OL") if available, not the updated line ("UL), since we compete against opening odds, if possible. We call the score and not the spread as such because our stats permit that calculation.

We write "were favored". The odds of the opening line are usually changed by the time we make our predictions. We do not compete against those changed odds. We used the CFPT as of the above date.

Thursday, October 27, 2016

Virginia Tech at Pittsburgh
The Hokies were favored over the Pirates by 3.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Virginia Tech by 4.90 points. The O/U (over/under) was 66 points.
Our Call: 30-24 for Virginia Tech.
Result: Virginia Tech kicker Joey Slye kicked 6 field goals in a 39-36 win for the Hokies, their first win on the road against the Panthers since 1999.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 1-0 in picking the winner, 0-1 against the spread, 0-1 againt the CFPT, 0-1 against the over/under.

Ohio at Toledo
The Rockets were favored over the Bobcats by 16.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Toledo by 17.64 points. The O/U (over/under) was 46.5. points.
Our Call: 37-24 for Toledo.
Result: Ohio remains bafflingly unpredictable, as the Bobacts upset the Rockets 31-26 on the road for the first Ohio win in Toledo in 49 years.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 1-1 in picking the winner, 1-1 against the spread, 1-1 againt the CFPT, 1-1 against the over/under.

Appalachian State at Georgia Southern
The Mountaineers were favored over the Eagles by 4.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Appalachian State by 4.58 points. The O/U (over/under) was 46 points.
Our Call: 27-20 for Appalachian State.
Result:The Mountaineers trailed 10-0 after the first quarter and then surged past the Eagles to win 34-10.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 2-1 in picking the winner, 2-1 against the spread, 2-1 againt the CFPT, 1-2 against the over/under.

Akron at Buffalo
The Zips were favored over the Bulls by 14.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Akron by 16.97 points. The O/U (over/under) was 58 points.
Our Call: 33-24 for Akron.
Result: A Bufallo team going through an otherwise disastrous season upset the Zips handily 41-20.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 2-2 in picking the winner, 3-1 against the spread, 3-1 againt the CFPT, 1-3 against the over/under.

California at USC (U of Southern California)
The Trojans were favored over the Golden Bears by 14.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Southern Cal by 12.93 points. The O/U (over/under) was 70.5 points.
Our Call: 40-28 for USC.
Result: The Trojans dominated Cal 45-24 as Sam Darnold threw for 5 TDs.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 3-2 in picking the winner, 3-2 against the spread, 3-2 againt the CFPT, 2-3 against the over/under.

Friday, October 28, 2016

Navy at South Florida
The Bulls were favored over the Midshipmen by 7 points. The CFPT prediction average favored South Florida by 4.71 points. The O/U (over/under) was 68 points.
Our Call: 34-31 for South Florida. Our stats rate these teams even. We give the advantage to the home team.
Result:The Bulls led 42-14 at halftime but had to hold on for a 52-45 win as the Midshipmen put up 24 points in the 4th quarter.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 4-2 in picking the winner, 3-2-1 against the spread, 3-3 againt the CFPT, 2-4 against the over/under.

San Diego State at Utah State
The Aztecs were favored over the Aggies by 6.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored San Diego State by 4.93 points. The O/U (over/under) was 46.5 points.
Our Call: 28-24 for San Diego State.
Result:The Aztecs beat the Aggies 40-13 as Donnel Pumphrey rushed for 223 yards on 32 carries, his 4th 200-yard game this year. No other FBS player has more than two 200-yard games.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 5-2 in picking the winner, 3-3-1 against the spread, 3-4 againt the CFPT, 3-4 against the over/under.

Air Force at Fresno State
The Falcons were favored over the Bulldogs by 12 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Air Force by 13.40 points. The O/U (over/under) was 53.5 points.
Our Call: 35-21 for Air Force.
Result: The Falcons stopped the Bulldogs 31-21.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 6-2 in picking the winner, 3-4-1 against the spread, 3-5 againt the CFPT, 3-5 against the over/under.

Saturday, October 29, 2016

Michigan at Michigan State
The Wolverines were favored over the Spartans by 20 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Michigan by 28.85 points. The O/U (over/under) was 56 points.
Our Call: 38-14 for Michigan.
Result: Michigan emerged as the victor against the Spartans 32-23, but endured what we experienced as a poorly playcalled and otherwise mismanaged 4th quarter after leading 30-10 with just over 7 and a half minutes to play. We saw the game on TV and it was remarkable that the Spartans gained 231 of their total 401 yards in that 4th quarter. You can't just sit back and expect to win. That will not hold. Not just defensive blunders were at fault, but the Michigan offense did not score a touchdown in the second half. Obviously, proper adjustments were lacking.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 7-2 in picking the winner, 3-5-1 against the spread, 4-5 againt the CFPT, 4-5 against the over/under.

Louisville at Virginia
The Cardinals were favored over the Cavaliers by 27 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Louisville by 25.32 points. The O/U (over/under) was 72 points.
Our Call: 45-21 for Louisville.
Result: The Cardinals came back from a 10-point deficit but looked defeated after Virginia went ahead again 25-24 with less than two minutes to play. However, Heisman-Trophy hopeful QB Lamar Jackson guided the team down the field for the game winner in the closing seconds as Louisville escaped with a 32-25 win over the Cavaliers.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 8-2 in picking the winner, 4-5-1 against the spread, 5-5 againt the CFPT, 5-5 against the over/under.

West Virginia at Oklahoma State
The Mountaineers were favored over the Cowboys by 1 point. The CFPT prediction average favored West Virginia by 4.93 points. The O/U (over/under) was 62.5 points.
Our Call: 37-27 for West Virginia.
Result: The Mountaineers fell from the ranks of the unbeaten 37-20 due to 3 turnovers to none for Oklahoma State, in spite of outgaining the Cowboys 421 to 358 yards.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 8-3 in picking the winner, 4-6-1 against the spread, 5-6 againt the CFPT, 5-6 against the over/under.

UCF at Houston
The Cougars were favored over the Knights by 12 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Houston by 12.63 points. The O/U (over/under) was 59.5 points.
Our Call: 31-24 for Houston.
Result: As happens rarely, we called this game right on the button of the final score 31-24. We were sorry to see UCF lose after leading 24-3 early in the 3rd quarter, but perhaps there is not enough talent depth there yet under 1st-year head coach Scott Frost to prevail against top opponents for 4 full quarters.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 9-3 in picking the winner, 5-6-1 against the spread, 6-6 againt the CFPT, 6-6 against the over/under.

Penn State at Purdue
The Nittany Lions were favored over the Boilermakers by 13.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Penn State by 16.42 points. The O/U (over/under) was 59 points.
Our Call: 34-21 for Penn State.
Result: After a 17-17 tie at halftime, the Nittany Lions broke loose for a devastating 62-24 thumping of the Boilermakers.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 10-3 in picking the winner, 5-7-1 against the spread, 6-7 againt the CFPT, 6-7 against the over/under.

Duke at Georgia Tech
The Yellow Jackets were favored over the Blue Devils by 8 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Georgia Tech by 7.49 points. The O/U (over/under) was 47 points.
Our Call: 34-20 for Georgia Tech.
Result:The Yellow Jackets led 28-7 at halftime only to go down 35-31 in the 4th quarter before recovering to win 38-35.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 11-3 in picking the winner, 5-8-1 against the spread, 6-8 againt the CFPT, 7-7 against the over/under.

Kentucky at Missouri
The Tigers were favored over the Wildcats by 4 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Missouri by 4.35 points. The O/U (over/under) was 63.5 points.
Our Call: 34-24 for Missouri.
Result: Improving Kentucky won their 3rd in a row, beating a reeling Mizzou team 35-21, who lost their 4th in a row.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 11-4 in picking the winner, 5-9-1 against the spread, 6-9 againt the CFPT, 7-8 against the over/under.

Connecticut at East Carolina
The Pirates were favored over the Huskies by 6 points. The CFPT prediction average favored East Carolina by 2.06 points. The O/U (over/under) was 70 points.
Our Call: 31-30 for UConn.
Result: The Pirates ransacked UConn 41-3 against a Huskies team in search of an offense (currently ranked 106th in FBS).
Thus far this 9th week, we are 11-5 in picking the winner, 5-10-1 against the spread, 6-10 againt the CFPT, 8-8 against the over/under.

Kansas State at Iowa State
The Wildcats were favored over the Cyclones by 7 points. The CFPT prediction average favored K-State by 9.48 points. The O/U (over/under) was 54 points.
Our Call: 30-27 for Kansas State.
Result: The Wildcats slipped past the Cyclones, who erupted for 16 unanswered 4th quarter points, 31-26.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 12-5 in picking the winner, 6-10-1 against the spread, 7-10 againt the CFPT, 9-8 against the over/under.

Minnesota at Illinois
The Golden Gophers were favored over the Illini by 6 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Minnesota by 5.24 points. The O/U (over/under) was 46.5 points.
Our Call: 27-26 for Illinois.
Result: The Golden Gophers pulled away steadily to win 40-17 over the Illini.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 12-6 in picking the winner, 6-11-1 against the spread, 7-11 againt the CFPT, 10-8 against the over/under.

Kent State at Central Michigan
The Chippewas were favored over the Golden Flashes by 12.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Central Michigan by 13.27 points. The O/U (over/under) was 48.5 points.
Our Call: 34-17 for Central Michigan.
Result: The Golden Flashes beating the Chippewas on the road? It happened, 27-24 on a game-ending field goal after Central Michigan had led 24-10.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 12-7 in picking the winner, 6-12-1 against the spread, 7-12 againt the CFPT, 11-8 against the over/under.

Boston College at North Carolina State
The Wolfpack were favored over the Eagles by 14.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored NC State by 15.35 points. The O/U (over/under) was 49.5 points.
Our Call: 31-14 for N.C. State.
Result: Boston College threw everything it had at the Wolfpack and picked up its first ACC win since the year 2014, beating N.C. State 21-14, a team that had taken Clemson to overtime.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 12-8 in picking the winner, 6-13-1 against the spread, 7-13 againt the CFPT, 12-8 against the over/under.

Wagner (FCS) at Massachusetts
The Minutement were favored over the Seahawks by 21 points. The O/U (over/under) was 52.5 points.
Our Call: 38-17 for UMass. The Seahawks are thus far 4-3 this season.
Result: UMass topped Wagner 34-10.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 13-8 in picking the winner, 6-13-2 against the spread, 7-13 againt the CFPT, 12-9 against the over/under.

Northwestern at Ohio State
The Buckeyes were favored over the Wildcats by 21.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Ohio State by 23.19 points. The O/U (over/under) was 54.5 points.
Our Call: 34-17 for Ohio State.
Result: Gritty Northwestern played the Buckeyes nearly even 406 to 431 total yards as Ohio State struggled to a 24-20 win over the Wildcats.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 14-8 in picking the winner, 7-13-2 against the spread, 8-13 againt the CFPT, 13-9 against the over/under.

Washington at Utah
The Huskies were favored over the Utes by 10.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Washington by 9.89 points. The O/U (over/under) was 52.5 points.
Our Call: 38-27 for Washington.
Result: The Huskies topped the Utes 31-24.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 15-8 in picking the winner, 7-14-2 against the spread, 8-14 againt the CFPT, 14-9 against the over/under.

Baylor at Texas
The Bears were favored over the Longhorns by 2.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Baylor by 6.83 points. The O/U (over/under) was 70 points.
Our Call: 31-27 for Baylor.
Result: The Longhorns prevailed over the Bears 35-34 with a last-minute field goal.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 15-9 in picking the winner, 7-15-2 against the spread, 9-14 againt the CFPT, 15-9 against the over/under.

Georgia vs. Florida at EverBank Field, Jacksonville, FL
The Gators were favored over the Bulldogs by 5.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Florida by 9.35 points. The O/U (over/under) was 44 points.
Our Call: 24-23 for Florida.
Result: The Gators remained on top of the SEC East with a 24-10 win.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 16-9 in picking the winner, 7-16-2 against the spread, 9-15 againt the CFPT, 15-10 against the over/under.

Cincinnati at Temple
The Owls were favored over the Bearcats by 8 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Temple by 12.21 points. The O/U (over/under) was 53.5 points.
Our Call: 34-21 for Temple.
Result: The Owls defeated the Bearcats 34-13.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 17-9 in picking the winner, 8-16-2 against the spread, 10-15 againt the CFPT, 15-11 against the over/under.

Army at Wake Forest
The Demon Deacons were favored over the Black Knights by 7.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Wake Forest by 9.87 points. The O/U (over/under) was 43 points.
Our Call: 30-20 for Wake Forest.
Result:The Black Knights upset the Demon Deacons with a 14-point 4th quarter, 21-13.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 17-10 in picking the winner, 8-17-2 against the spread, 10-16 againt the CFPT, 15-12 against the over/under.

Western Kentucky at Florida Atlantic (FAU)
The Hilltoppers were favored over the Owls by 20 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Western Kentucky by 21.40 points. The O/U (over/under) was 67 points.
Our Call: 45-21 for Western Kentucky.
Result: The Hilltoppers raced past the Owls 52-3.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 18-10 in picking the winner, 9-17-2 against the spread, 11-16 againt the CFPT, 16-12 against the over/under.

Miami of Florida at Notre Dame
The Fighting Irish were favored over the Hurricanes by 1 point. The CFPT prediction average favored Miami by 3.59 points. The O/U (over/under) was 62.5 points.
Our Call: 31-27 for Miami.
Result: The Fighting Irish handed the Hurricanes their 4th straight loss 30-27 with a field goal in the final minute.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 18-11 in picking the winner, 9-18-2 against the spread, 11-17 againt the CFPT, 17-12 against the over/under.

Miami of Ohio at Eastern Michigan
The Eagles were favored over the Redhawks by 6.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Eastern Michigan by 7.77 points. The O/U (over/under) was 51.5 points.
Our Call: 31-23 for Eastern Michigan.
Result: The Redhawks beat the Eagles 28-15.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 18-12 in picking the winner, 9-19-2 against the spread, 11-18 againt the CFPT, 17-13 against the over/under.

Texas Tech at TCU
The Horned Frogs were favored over the Red Raiders by 7 points. The CFPT prediction average favored TCU by 6.79 points. The O/U (over/under) was 84 points.
Our Call: 41-37 for TCU.
Result: The Red Raiders downed the Horned Frogs 27-24 in two overtimes in a game of deflated offenses.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 18-13 in picking the winner, 10-19-2 against the spread, 12-18 againt the CFPT, 18-13 against the over/under.

Maryland at Indiana
The Hoosiers were favored over the Terrapins by 5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Indiana by 2.58 points. The O/U (over/under) was 49.5 points.
Our Call: 31-21 for Indiana.
Result:The Hoosiers came back from two deficits to emerge the winner 42-36.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 19-13 in picking the winner, 11-19-2 against the spread, 13-18 againt the CFPT, 19-13 against the over/under.

Samford (FCS) at Mississippi State
The Mississippi State Bulldogs were favored over the Samford Bulldogs by 21.5 points.The O/U (over/under) was 65.5 points.
Our Call: 34-17 for Mississippi State. Samford is 6-1 this year and currently ranked 20th in the FCS.
Result: In an offensive donnybrook in which both teams put up 669 and 627 yards respectively, Mississippi State emerged the winner over Samford 56-41.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 20-13 in picking the winner, 12-19-2 against the spread, 13-18 againt the CFPT, 19-14 against the over/under.

SMU at Tulane
The Mustangs were favored over the Green Wave by 2.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored SMU by 1.35 points. The O/U (over/under) was 53.5 points.
Our Call: 27-20 for SMU.
Result: The Mustangs topped the Green Wave 35-31.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 21-13 in picking the winner, 13-19-2 against the spread, 14-18 againt the CFPT, 19-15 against the over/under.

Arizona State at Oregon
The Ducks were favored over the Sun Devils by 7.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Oregon by 0.28 points. The O/U (over/under) was 78.5 points.
Our Call: 38-31 for Oregon.
Result: Oregon topped the Sun Devils 54-35.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 22-13 in picking the winner, 13-20-2 against the spread, 15-18 againt the CFPT, 19-16 against the over/under.

Georgia State at South Alabama
The Jaguars were favored over the Panthers by 2.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored South Alabama by 3.16 points. The O/U (over/under) was 47 points.
Our Call: 27-26 for South Alabama.
Result:The Jaguars squeked past the Panthers 13-10.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 23-13 in picking the winner, 13-21-2 against the spread, 16-18 againt the CFPT, 19-17 against the over/under.

Nebraska  at Wisconsin
The Badgers were favored over the Cornhuskers by 8 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Wisconsin by 8.02 points. The O/U (over/under) was 40.5 points.
Our Call: 33-20 for Wisconsin
Result: As a Nebraska alum, we were pleasantly surprised to see the Huskers holding their own against the Badgers, who prevailed in overtime 23-17.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 24-13 in picking the winner, 13-22-2 against the spread, 16-19 againt the CFPT, 19-18 against the over/under.

Boise State at Wyoming
The Broncos were favored over the Cowboys by 14 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Boise State by 13.14 points. The O/U (over/under) was 61.5 points.
Our Call: 34-24 for Boise State.
Result: Wyoming continued to surprise with a 30-28 win over Boise State, decided by a safety with 1:32 to play.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 25-13 in picking the winner, 14-22-2 against the spread, 17-19 againt the CFPT, 20-18 against the over/under.

Kansas at Oklahoma
The Sooners were favored over the Jayhawks by 41 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Oklahoma by 35.26 points. The O/U (over/under) was 71 points.
Our Call: 52-17 for Oklahoma.
Result:The Sooners led 56-3 after three quarters and that was the final score.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 26-13 in picking the winner, 14-23-2 against the spread, 17-20 againt the CFPT, 21-18 against the over/under.

Rice at Louisiana Tech
The Bulldogs were favored over the Owls by 23.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Louisiana Tech by 21.36 points. The O/U (over/under) was 70.5 points.
Our Call: 49-28 for Louisiana Tech.
Result: The Bulldogs crushed Rice 61-16.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 27-13 in picking the winner, 14-24-2 against the spread, 17-21 againt the CFPT, 22-18 against the over/under.

Middle Tennessee (MTSU) at Florida International (FIU)
The Blue Raiders were favored over the Golden Panthers by 16.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Middle Tennessee by 17.96 points. The O/U (over/under) was 64.5 points.
Our Call: 41-27 for Middle Tennessee.
Result: The Blue Raiders led early 21-0 but then had to hold on for a 42-35 win.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 28-13 in picking the winner, 15-24-2 against the spread, 18-21 againt the CFPT, 23-18 against the over/under.

North Texas at UTSA (Texas San Antonio)
The Roadrunners were favored over the Mean Green by 2.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored North Texas by 0.80 points. The O/U (over/under) was 53.5 points.
Our Call: 28-27 for North Texas.
Result: The Roadrunners raced past North Texas 31-17.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 28-14 in picking the winner, 15-25-2 against the spread, 18-22 againt the CFPT, 23-19 against the over/under.

Marshall at Southern Mississippi
The Golden Eagles were favored over the Thundering Herd by 14 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Southern Miss by 12.98 points. The O/U (over/under) was 66.5 points.
Our Call: 41-24 for Southern Miss.
Result: Southern Miss prevailed 24-14.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 29-14 in picking the winner, 15-26-2 against the spread, 18-23 againt the CFPT, 24-19 against the over/under.

Louisiana Monroe (ULM) at Arkansas State
The Red Wolves were favored over the Warhawks by 18 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Arkansas State by 14.56 points. The O/U (over/under) was 57.5 points.
Our Call: 38-24 for Arkansas State.
Result: The Redwolves led 42-3 at the half in a lopsided 51-10 win.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 30-14 in picking the winner, 15-27-2 against the spread, 18-24 againt the CFPT, 25-19 against the over/under.

Auburn at Mississippi
The Tigers were favored over the Rebels by 2 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Auburn by 3.96 points. The O/U (over/under) was 63 points.
Our Call: 34-30 for Auburn.
Result: Auburn won their 5th straight game 40-29 as Ole Miss lost their 3rd straight.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 31-14 in picking the winner, 16-27-2 against the spread, 19-24 againt the CFPT, 26-19 against the over/under.

Tennessee at South Carolina
The Volunteers were favored over the Gamecocks by 12.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored the Vols by 13.72 points. The O/U (over/under) was 50.5 points.
Our Call: 34-20 for Tennessee.
Result:The Gamecocks upset the Vols 24-21, who lost their 3rd in a row.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 31-15 in picking the winner, 16-28-2 against the spread, 19-25 againt the CFPT, 26-20 against the over/under.

New Mexico State at Texas A&M
The Texas A&M Aggies were favored over the New Mexico State Aggies by 41 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Texas A&M by 41.66 points. The O/U (over/under) was 68 points.
Our Call: 49-17 for Texas A&M.
Result: Texas A&M dominated New Mexico State 52-10.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 32-15 in picking the winner, 16-29-2 against the spread, 19-26 againt the CFPT, 27-20 against the over/under.

Clemson at Florida State
The Tigers were favored over the Seminoles by 2.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Clemson by 6.19 points. The O/U (over/under) was 58.5 points.
Our Call: 31-30 for Clemson.
Result: Clemson outscored Florida State 17-6 in the final quarter to win 37-34 and remain undefeated.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 33-15 in picking the winner, 16-30-2 against the spread, 20-26 againt the CFPT, 28-20 against the over/under.

Tulsa at Memphis
The Tigers were favored over the Golden Hurricane by 6.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Memphis by 7.40 points. The O/U (over/under) was 69 points.
Our Call: 30-27 for Memphis.
Result: Tulsa outscored the Tigers 59-30 as James Flanders scored 5 TDs on 249 yards on 33 carries.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 33-16 in picking the winner, 17-30-2 against the spread, 21-26 againt the CFPT, 28-21 against the over/under.

Old Dominion at UTEP (Texas El Paso)
The Monarchs were favored over the Miners by 5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Old Dominion by 9.20 points. The O/U (over/under) was 57 points.
Our Call: 33-30 for Old Dominion.
Result: Old Dominion topped UTEP 31-21.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 34-16 in picking the winner, 17-31-2 against the spread, 21-27 againt the CFPT, 28-22 against the over/under.

UNLV at San Jose State
The Rebels were favored over the Spartans by 1 point. The CFPT prediction average favored UNLV by 2.65 points. The O/U (over/under) was 59 points.
Our Call: 33-30 for UNLV.
Result: The Spartans edged the Rebels 30-24.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 34-17 in picking the winner, 17-32-2 against the spread, 21-28 againt the CFPT, 28-23 against the over/under.

Washington State at Oregon State
The Cougars were favored over the Beavers by 15.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Washington State by 15.54 points. The O/U (over/under) was 65.5 points.
Our Call: 34-24 for Washington State.
Result: Washington State raced back from a 24-6 halftime deficit to win 35-31 as no team then scored in the last 10 minutes.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 35-17 in picking the winner, 18-32-2 against the spread, 22-28 againt the CFPT, 28-24 against the over/under.

Stanford at Arizona
The Cardinal were favored over the Wildcats by 7 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Stanford by 9.80 points. The O/U (over/under) was 48 points.
Our Call: 24-23 for Stanford.
Result: The Stanford offense finally showed signs of life in a 34-10 win.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 36-17 in picking the winner, 18-33-2 against the spread, 22-29 againt the CFPT, 29-24 against the over/under.

New Mexico at Hawaii
The Warriors were favored over the Lobos by 2 points. The CFPT prediction average favored New Mexico by 0.39 points. The O/U (over/under) was 66 points.
Our Call: 38-35 for Hawaii.
Result:The Lobos beat the Warriors 28-21.
Thus far this 9th week, we are 36-18 in picking the winner, 18-34-2 against the spread, 22-30 againt the CFPT, 29-25 against the over/under.

Coastal Carolina at Presbyterian

Our Call: 41-17 for Coastal Carolina.
Result: The Chanticleers rolled past the Blue Hose 48-17.
This 9th week, we were thus 37-18 in picking the winner, 18-34-2 against the spread, 22-30 againt the CFPT, 29-25 against the over/under.

Tuesday, October 25, 2016

College Football Game Predictions for Week 9 2016 FBS by SportPundit

College Football Game Predictions for Week 9 2016 FBS by SportPundit

In Week 8, our change in the calculation of a rating point as equatable to 0.7 scoreboard points rather than to 1 scoreboard point brought better results.
We thus finished as follows last week:
44-14 in picking the winner
35-20-2 against the spread
31-23 against the CFPT prediction average, and
31-25 against the over/under.

After Week 8 our cumulative season results are:
388-125 in picking the winner
238-247-21 against the spread
189-220 against the CFPT average, and
259-228-15 against the over/under.

Notice as of this week: This season, our cumulative over/under results are opposite our results against the spread. Normally, that should not be. We use the same system for both, so something needs to be changed. We have examined the data and determined that our own spread has too often been too high based on our equation of .1 of our rating points as equatable with 1 point on the scoreboard. We scaled that back this week to ca. .1 rating point =  only about .7 scoreboard points, so that 1 rating point = 1 touchdown. In other words, if a team rated at +1.0 met a team rated at -2.0 under our system, that is a difference of 30 x .1 rating points or 3 full rating points which we have thus far equated as 30 scoreboard points -- which has proven to be too many. Under the revised system, our prediction would now be calculated as 21 points, i.e. 3 TDs, rather than 30 scoreboard points, and we may or may not adjust for home field advantage, as the case may be. Our over/under predictions for total score as based on yards per play do not change much. We will make subjective adjustments.
__________

Below are our -- SportPundit -- prediction RESULTS for NCAA Division I FBS College Football in ESPN Week 9, based primarily on our After Week 8 College Football Rankings and Ratings for FBS 2016-2017 by SportPundit. We also look at the USA Today Sagarin College Football 2016 Ratings, the Massey Ratings for 2016 NCAA I Football and the Dr. Kambour home field advantage calculations.

Our system is based on net average yards per play stats, calibrated primarily by adjusting for schedule difficulty, i.e. the teams thus far played. Other adjustments are also made (*=adjustment) because the ypp system is not perfect, often exacerbating stats made against much weaker or much stronger teams, nor can schedule difficulty always be pinpointed with accuracy since many schedules include FCS teams. We take the cumulative yards per play stat data from cfbstats.com and from the college and university football athletic pages online.

Caveat emptor (Buyer beware): We make this material available in good fun out of interest for the sport of college football. Please do not rely on our material to place bets or wagers of any kind. No one knows the exact outcome of a game or a season before it is played and that is what makes it so interesting. We disclaim any and all liability for the consequences of anyone relying in any way upon our postings, analysis, links or reasoning - for which we make no warranty of accuracy. May the best team win.

This week we took the opening lines (if available) and the CFPT prediction average from the CFPT (College Football Prediction Tracker), as posted on Monday, October 24, 2016 : 10:18 AM. We take the -- usually later-posted -- opening over/under from Oddsshark viz. VegasInsider.com as well as later-posted opening odds. All odds and stats are here by us posted WITHOUT ANY guarantee of accuracy, and without any liability on our part for our posted materials or links to 3rd party sites. We do our predictions for fun. If important for the reader, the reader must consult the original sites. We use the opening line ("OL") if available, not the updated line ("UL), since we compete against opening odds, if possible. We call the score and not the spread as such because our stats permit that calculation.

We write "were favored". The odds of the opening line are usually changed by the time we make our predictions. We do not compete against those changed odds. We used the CFPT as of the above date.

Thursday, October 27, 2016

Virginia Tech at Pittsburgh
The Hokies were favored over the Pirates by 3.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Virginia Tech by 4.90 points. The O/U (over/under) was 66 points.
Our Call: 30-24 for Virginia Tech.
Result: ?

Ohio at Toledo
The Rockets were favored over the Bobcats by 16.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Toledo by 17.64 points. The O/U (over/under) was 46.5. points.
Our Call: 37-24 for Toledo.
Result: ?

Appalachian State at Georgia Southern
The Mountaineers were favored over the Eagles by 4.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Appalachian State by 4.58 points. The O/U (over/under) was 46 points.
Our Call: 27-20 for Appalachian State.
Result: ?

Akron at Buffalo
The Zips were favored over the Bulls by 14.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Akron by 16.97 points. The O/U (over/under) was 58 points.
Our Call: 33-24 for Akron.
Result: ?

California at USC (U of Southern California)
The Trojans were favored over the Golden Bears by 14.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Southern Cal by 12.93 points. The O/U (over/under) was 70.5 points.
Our Call: 40-28 for USC.
Result: ?

Friday, October 28, 2016

Navy at South Florida
The Bulls were favored over the Midshipmen by 7 points. The CFPT prediction average favored South Florida by 4.71 points. The O/U (over/under) was 68 points.
Our Call: 34-31 for South Florida. Our stats rate these teams even. We give the advantage to the home team.
Result: ?

San Diego State at Utah State
The Aztecs were favored over the Aggies by 6.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored San Diego State by 4.93 points. The O/U (over/under) was 46.5 points.
Our Call: 28-24 for San Diego State.
Result: ?

Air Force at Fresno State
The Falcons were favored over the Bulldogs by 12 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Air Force by 13.40 points. The O/U (over/under) was 53.5 points.
Our Call: 35-21 for Air Force.
Result: ?

Saturday, October 29, 2016

Michigan at Michigan State
The Wolverines were favored over the Spartans by 20 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Michigan by 28.85 points. The O/U (over/under) was 56 points.
Our Call: 38-14 for Michigan.
Result: ?

Louisville at Virginia
The Cardinals were favored over the Cavaliers by 27 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Louisville by 25.32 points. The O/U (over/under) was 72 points.
Our Call: 45-21 for Louisville.
Result: ?

West Virginia at Oklahoma State
The Mountaineers were favored over the Cowboys by 1 point. The CFPT prediction average favored West Virginia by 4.93 points. The O/U (over/under) was 62.5 points.
Our Call: 37-27 for West Virginia.
Result: ?

UCF at Houston
The Cougars were favored over the Knights by 12 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Houston by 12.63 points. The O/U (over/under) was 59.5 points.
Our Call: 31-24 for Houston.
Result: ?

Penn State at Purdue
The Nittany Lions were favored over the Boilermakers by 13.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Penn State by 16.42 points. The O/U (over/under) was 59 points.
Our Call: 34-21 for Penn State.
Result: ?

Duke at Georgia Tech
The Yellow Jackets were favored over the Blue Devils by 8 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Georgia Tech by 7.49 points. The O/U (over/under) was 47 points.
Our Call: 34-20 for Georgia Tech.
Result: ?

Kentucky at Missouri
The Tigers were favored over the Wildcats by 4 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Missouri by 4.35 points. The O/U (over/under) was 63.5 points.
Our Call: 34-24 for Missouri.
Result: ?

Connecticut at East Carolina
The Pirates were favored over the Huskies by 6 points. The CFPT prediction average favored East Carolina by 2.06 points. The O/U (over/under) was 70 points.
Our Call: 31-30 for UConn.
Result: ?

Kansas State at Iowa State
The Wildcats were favored over the Cyclones by 7 points. The CFPT prediction average favored K-State by 9.48 points. The O/U (over/under) was 54 points.
Our Call: 30-27 for Kansas State.
Result: ?

Minnesota at Illinois
The Golden Gophers were favored over the Illini by 6 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Minnesota by 5.24 points. The O/U (over/under) was ?? points.
Our Call: 27-26 for Illinois.
Result: ?

Kent State at Central Michigan
The Chippewas were favored over the Golden Flashes by 12.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Central Michigan by 13.27 points. The O/U (over/under) was 48.5 points.
Our Call: 34-17 for Central Michigan.
Result: ?

Boston College at North Carolina State
The Wolfpack were favored over the Eagles by 14.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored NC State by 15.35 points. The O/U (over/under) was ?? points.
Our Call: 31-14 for N.C. State.
Result: ?

Wagner (FCS) at Massachusetts
The ?? were favored over the ?? by ?? points. The O/U (over/under) was ?? points.
Our Call: 38-17 for UMass. The Seahawks are thus far 4-3 this season.
Result: ?

Northwestern at Ohio State
The Buckeyes were favored over the Wildcats by 21.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Ohio State by 23.19 points. The O/U (over/under) was 54.5 points.
Our Call: 34-17 for Ohio State.
Result: ?

Washington at Utah
The Huskies were favored over the Utes by 10.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Washington by 9.89 points. The O/U (over/under) was 52.5 points.
Our Call: 38-27 for Washington.
Result: ?

Baylor at Texas
The Bears were favored over the Longhorns by 2.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Baylor by 6.83 points. The O/U (over/under) was 70 points.
Our Call: 31-27 for Baylor.
Result: ?

Georgia vs. Florida at EverBank Field, Jacksonville, FL
The Gators were favored over the Bulldogs by 5.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Florida by 9.35 points. The O/U (over/under) was 44 points.
Our Call: 24-23 for Florida.
Result: ?

Cincinnati at Temple
The Owls were favored over the Bearcats by 8 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Temple by 12.21 points. The O/U (over/under) was 53.5 points.
Our Call: 34-21 for Temple.
Result: ?

Army at Wake Forest
The Demon Deacons were favored over the Black Knights by 7.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Wake Forest by 9.87 points. The O/U (over/under) was 43 points.
Our Call: 30-20 for Wake Forest.
Result: ?

Western Kentucky at Florida Atlantic (FAU)
The Hilltoppers were favored over the Owls by 20 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Western Kentucky by 21.40 points. The O/U (over/under) was 67 points.
Our Call: 45-21 for Western Kentucky.
Result: ?

Miami of Florida at Notre Dame
The Fighting Irish were favored over the Hurricanes by 1 point. The CFPT prediction average favored Miami by 3.59 points. The O/U (over/under) was 62.5 points.
Our Call: 31-27 for Miami.
Result: ?

Miami of Ohio at Eastern Michigan
The Eagles were favored over the Redhawks by 6.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Eastern Michigan by 7.77 points. The O/U (over/under) was 51.5 points.
Our Call: 31-23 for Eastern Michigan.
Result: ?

Texas Tech at TCU
The Horned Frogs were favored over the Red Raiders by 7 points. The CFPT prediction average favored TCU by 6.79 points. The O/U (over/under) was 84 points.
Our Call: 41-37 for TCU.
Result: ?

Maryland at Indiana
The Hoosiers were favored over the Terrapins by 5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Indiana by 2.58 points. The O/U (over/under) was 49.5 points.
Our Call: 31-21 for Indiana.
Result: ?

Samford (FCS) at Mississippi State
The ?? were favored over the ?? by ?? points.The O/U (over/under) was ?? points.
Our Call: 34-17 for Mississippi State. Samford is 6-1 this year and currently ranked 20th in the FCS.
Result: ?

SMU at Tulane
The Mustangs were favored over the Green Wave by 2.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored SMU by 1.35 points. The O/U (over/under) was 53.5 points.
Our Call: 27-20 for SMU.
Result: ?

Arizona State at Oregon
The Ducks were favored over the Sun Devils by 7.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Oregon by 0.28 points. The O/U (over/under) was 78.5 points.
Our Call: 38-31 for Oregon.
Result: ?

Georgia State at South Alabama
The Jaguars were favored over the Panthers by 2.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored South Alabama by 3.16 points. The O/U (over/under) was ?? points.
Our Call: 27-26 for South Alabama.
Result: ?

Nebraska  at Wisconsin
The Badgers were favored over the Cornhuskers by 8 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Wisconsin by 8.02 points. The O/U (over/under) was 40.5 points.
Our Call: 33-20 for Wisconsin
Result: ?

Boise State at Wyoming
The Broncos were favored over the Cowboys by 14 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Boise State by 13.14 points. The O/U (over/under) was 61.5 points.
Our Call: 34-24 for Boise State.
Result: ?

Kansas at Oklahoma
The Sooners were favored over the Jayhawks by 41 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Oklahoma by 35.26 points. The O/U (over/under) was 71 points.
Our Call: 52-17 for Oklahoma.
Result: ?

Rice at Louisiana Tech
The Bulldogs were favored over the Owls by 23.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Louisiana Tech by 21.36 points. The O/U (over/under) was 70.5 points.
Our Call: 49-28 for Louisiana Tech.
Result: ?

Middle Tennessee (MTSU) at Florida International (FIU)
The Blue Raiders were favored over the Golden Panthers by 16.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Middle Tennessee by 17.96 points. The O/U (over/under) was 64.5 points.
Our Call: 41-27 for Middle Tennessee.
Result: ?

North Texas at UTSA (Texas San Antonio)
The Roadrunners were favored over the Mean Green by 2.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored North Texas by 0.80 points. The O/U (over/under) was 53.5 points.
Our Call: 28-27 for North Texas.
Result: ?

Marshall at Southern Mississippi
The Golden Eagles were favored over the Thundering Herd by 14 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Southern Miss by 12.98 points. The O/U (over/under) was 66.5 points.
Our Call: 41-24 for Southern Miss.
Result: ?

Louisiana Monroe (ULM) at Arkansas State
The Red Wolves were favored over the Warhawks by 18 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Arkansas State by 14.56 points. The O/U (over/under) was 57.5 points.
Our Call: 38-24 for Arkansas State.
Result: ?

Auburn at Mississippi
The Tigers were favored over the Rebels by 2 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Auburn by 3.96 points. The O/U (over/under) was 63 points.
Our Call: 34-30 for Auburn.
Result: ?

Tennessee at South Carolina
The Volunteers were favored over the Gamecocks by 12.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored the Vols by 13.72 points. The O/U (over/under) was 50.5 points.
Our Call: 34-20 for Tennessee.
Result: ?

New Mexico State at Texas A&M
The Texas A&M Aggies were favored over the New Mexico State Aggies by 41 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Texas A&M by 41.66 points. The O/U (over/under) was 68 points.
Our Call: 49-17 for Texas A&M.
Result: ?

Clemson at Florida State
The Tigers were favored over the Seminoles by 2.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Clemson by 6.19 points. The O/U (over/under) was 58.5 points.
Our Call: 31-30 for Clemson.
Result: ?

Tulsa at Memphis
The Tigers were favored over the Golden Hurricane by 6.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Memphis by 7.40 points. The O/U (over/under) was 69 points.
Our Call: 30-27 for Memphis.
Result: ?

Old Dominion at UTEP (Texas El Paso)
The Monarchs were favored over the Miners by 5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Old Dominion by 9.20 points. The O/U (over/under) was 57 points.
Our Call: 33-30 for Old Dominion.
Result: ?

UNLV at San Jose State
The Rebels were favored over the Spartans by 1 point. The CFPT prediction average favored UNLV by 2.65 points. The O/U (over/under) was 59 points.
Our Call: 33-30 for UNLV.
Result: ?

Washington State at Oregon State
The Cougars were favored over the Beavers by 15.5 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Washington State by 15.54 points. The O/U (over/under) was 65.5 points.
Our Call: 34-24 for Washington State.
Result: ?

Stanford at Arizona
The Cardinal were favored over the Wildcats by 7 points. The CFPT prediction average favored Stanford by 9.80 points. The O/U (over/under) was 48 points.
Our Call: 24-23 for Stanford.
Result: ?

New Mexico at Hawaii
The Warriors were favored over the Lobos by 2 points. The CFPT prediction average favored New Mexico by 0.39 points. The O/U (over/under) was ?? points.
Our Call: 38-35 for Hawaii.
Result: ?

Coastal Carolina at Presbyterian
The ?? were favored over the ?? by ?? points. The O/U (over/under) was ?? points.
Our Call: 41-17 for Coastal Carolina.
Result:

 

Monday, October 24, 2016

Week 8 College Football Ratings & Rankings FBS 2016-2017 - SportPundit

Week 8 College Football Ratings & Rankings FBS 2016-2017 by SportPundit

These are our college football rankings after Week 8 of the 2016 season, constituting "Week 8" according to the ESPN and NCAA.com numbering, whereas some other sources may use "Week 9" due to the game in Australia of the "one-game week" that preceded normal matches in the actual "Week 1".

Our system is based on net average yards per play stats, which we calibrate primarily by adjusting for schedule difficulty, which we take as the average rank of the opponents played (we multiply the calculated, adjusted rank by 3, divide by 100, and subtract that from the NAYPPA). Note that our calculation is not the same as the Sagarin or Massey "RANK" of schedule difficulty, which is a different calculation. Other adjustments can also be made (*=adjustment). We take the cumulative yards per play stat data from cfbstats.com or college and university football athletic pages online, as linked below for each team.

Caveat emptor (Buyer beware): We make this material available in good fun out of interest for the sport of college football. Please do not rely on our material to place bets or wagers of any kind. No one knows the exact outcome of a game or a season before it is played and that is what makes it so interesting. We disclaim any and all liability for the consequences of anyone relying in any way upon our postings, analysis, links or reasoning -- for which we make no warranty of accuracy. May the best team win.

Week 8 College Football Rankings FBS 2016-2017 by SportPundit
Week 8 RANK 2016-2017 by Sport PunditTEAM Name(# = head coaching changeNAYPPA= net average yards per play advantage offense over defense, stats from cfbstats.com (our calculation)yards per play offense via cfbstats.com the links below are to the school sites yards per play defense via cfbstats.comSchedule difficulty based on Massey Ratings, Sagarin, and our own ratings of average rank of opponents played (*=adjusted)Won-loss record (W-L) for the 2016-2017 season2016-2017 Team Rating by Sport Pundit after Week 8
1Alabama2.66.794.2230*8-0+1.7
2Michigan2.76.373.6745*7-0+1.3
3Ohio State2.26.404.1945*6-1+0.7
4Auburn1.66.414.8220*4-2+0.6
5Washington2.97.474.5780*7-0+0.5
6Clemson2.06.184.1750*7-0+0.5
7Louisville3.57.974.4995*6-1+0.5
8LSU # 2.47.004.5650*5-2+0.5
9Texas A&M1.16.465.3320*6-1+0.3
10Wisconsin0.55.344.890*5-2+0.1
11W. Virginia1.56.615.1445*6-0+0.1
12Oklahoma1.77.796.0845*5-2-0.1
13Tennessee -0.45.395.760*5-2-0.3
14Florida State0.1 6.296.1810*5-2-0.6
15Baylor # 2.56.604.15105*6-0 -0.6
16Florida1.75.844.1375*5-1-0.7
17Mississippi0.76.525.8720*3-4-0.7
18N. Carolina1.36.465.1935*6-2-0.7
19Boise State2.26.954.79100*7-0-0.8
20Virg. Tech #1.35.654.3960*5-2-0.9
21Wash. St.0.25.985.8130*5-2-1.1
22USC #0.96.225.3645*4-3-1.1
23Colorado1.66.174.5775*6-2-1.1
24 Nebraska0.86.135.3170*7-0-1.3
25Penn State0.45.685.2845*5-2-1.3
26W. Michigan1.26.755.6085*8-0-1.4
27Stanford-0.55.055.5110*4-3-1.4
28Miami (Fl.) #2.26.794.59100*4-3-1.4
29Georgia# -0.15.385.5025*4-3-1.5
30N.C. State0.75.765.0655*4-3-1.6
31 Arkansas-1.05.796.820*5-3-1.6
32Kansas St.-0.15.375.5030*4-3-1.6
33Okla. St.0.16.196.0545**5-2-1.6
34Texas0.15.955.8130*3-4-1.6
35Northwestern-0.45.065.4420*4-3-1.6
36Indiana0.75.775.0750*3-4-1.6
37Oregon0.46.616.2335*2-5-1.6
38Utah0.15.725.6450*7-1-1.6
39Pittsburgh0.05.955.9845*5-2-1.7
40TCU0.66.615.5665*4-2 -1.8
41BYU#-0.75.326.0210*4-4-1.8
42UCLA0.75.654.9750*3-5-1.8
43Troy1.16.175.0790*6-1-1.8
44Houston0.85.724.91806-2-2.0
45Arizona St.-1.25.266.4405*5-3-2.0
46Air Force0.65.945.3665*4-3-2.0
47Toledo #1.57.275.76110*6-1-2.0
48Arizona-0.16.166.2730*2-5-2.0
49Texas Tech0.47.366.9655*3-4-2.0
50S. Diego St1.76.194.48115*6-1-2.0
51C. Michigan0.96.195.2880*5-3-2.1
52Navy0.66.285.7385*5-1-2.1
53Tulsa0.45.665.2970*5-2-2.1
54California0.26.246.0255*4-3-2.1
55Ga. Tech 0.65.935.3870*4-3-2.1
56S. Carolina #-0.34.925.2635*3-4-2.1
57Temple0.95.834.9880*5-3-2.1
58S. Florida1.66.925.37110*6-2-2.1
59Michigan St.0.35.845.5050*2-5-2.2
60 Memphis #0.96.175.3190*5-2-2.2
61SMU0.05.405.3650*3-4-2.3
62Wake Forest-0.74.745.4540*5-2-2.3
63Notre Dame0.55.975.5260*2-5-2.3
64Syracuse #-0.65.796.3430*4-4-2.3
65Kentucky0.15.795.7460*4-3-2.3
66Miss. St.0.15.515.4545*2-5-2.3
67Appal. St. 0.25.495.3170*5-2-2.3
68MTSU1.46.715.27110*5-2-2.3
69LA Tech1.87.665.84120*5-3-2.4
70Iowa0.35.585.2870*5-3-2.4
71Missouri #0.66.285.6870*2-5-2.5
72Minnesota #0.65.464.8690*5-2-2.5
73Maryland #1.16.094.97105*5-2-2.5
74UCF #0.65.304.6985*4-3-2.5
75Utah State 0.55.514.9775*3-4-2.6
76 Vanderbilt -1.04.775.7825*4-4-2.6
77W. Kentucky 1.87.295.54125*5-3-2.6
78Oregon S.-0.55.105.5540*2-5-2.7
79E. Carolina #-0.46.136.4950*2-4-2.7
80Akron0.76.625.9495*5-3-2.8
81Iowa State #-0.7 5.225.9435*1-6-3.0
82O. Dominion0.36.015.6790*4-3-3.0
83Illinois #0.36.005.7080*2-5-3.1
84Army1.36.004.69130*4-3-3.2
85UConn-0.85.095.8645*3-5-3.2
86Cincinnati0.05.525.5285*4-3-3.2
87Wyoming-0.15.986.0590*5-2-3.2
88Purdue-0.75.486.1660*3-4-3.3
89Boston C.-0.14.764.8880*3-4-3.3
90N. Illinois-0.16.026.1170*2-6-3.3
91Ga. South. #-0.35.455.7885*4-3-3.4
92Virginia #-0.95.256.1750*2-5-3.4
93Duke-0.54.965.4370*3-4-3.4
94UNLV0.46.055.69100*3-5-3.4
95Hawaii #0.26.446.2595*4-4-3.4
96Arkansas St.-0.45.495.8875*2-4-3.4
97Georgia St. 0.05.095.0680*2-5-3.4
98E. Michigan 0.45.955.55105*5-3-3.4
99N. Texas # -0.64.925.4875*4-3-3.4
100Ohio0.45.425.04110*5-3-3.5
101Tulane #-0.34.985.2485*3-4-3.6
102Idaho -1.25.326.4855*4-4-3.6
103Ball State # -0.55.556.0475*4-4-3.6
104UTSA # 0.25.885.66100*3-4-3.6
105South. Miss#0.06.206.24100*4-3-3.6
106S. Alabama -0.55.345.8580*3-4-3.7
107Colorado St.-0.45.626.0385*4-4-3.7
108Miami (Oh.)0.05.135.1785*2-6-3.8
109Rutgers #-1.94.326.2125*2-6-3.8
110N. Mex. St.-0.95.636.5265*2-5-3.8
111UTEP-0.55.686.2175*2-5-3.8
112New Mexico1.06.935.92140*4-3-3.8
113UMass -1.34.926.1845*1-7-4.1
114LA Lafayette -0.25.015.18105*3-4-4.1
115Kansas-0.75.095.7775*1-6-4.1
116San Jose St.-1.55.176.7250*2-6-4.2
117Nevada-1.05.356.3075*3-5-4.2
118Kent State-0.54.575.0585*2-6-4.2
119LA Monroe #-1.25.366.6070*2-5-4.3
120Fresno St.-1.14.815.8865*1-7-4.4
121Fl. Int'l FIU-0.85.256.0185*3-5-4.4
122Bowling G. #-1.65.046.6645*1-7-4.4
123Charlotte -1.15.076.2080*3-5-4.5
124Rice-1.95.407.2550*1-6-4.6
125Marshall-1.15.336.4285*2-5-4.6
126Texas St. #-1.64.736.3175*2-5-4.8
127Buffalo-1.24.765.9480*1-6-4.8
128Fl. Atlantic -1.25.096.2580*1-6-4.8
***Cstl. Carolina 0.65.95.3170*5-2-4.9
***UAB -(Blazers back in 2017)
--

--

--

--

--

--




Sky Earth Native America


Sky Earth Native America 1 :
American Indian Rock Art Petroglyphs Pictographs
Cave Paintings Earthworks & Mounds as Land Survey & Astronomy
,
Volume 1, Edition 2, 266 pages, by Andis Kaulins.

  • Sky Earth Native America 2 :
    American Indian Rock Art Petroglyphs Pictographs
    Cave Paintings Earthworks & Mounds as Land Survey & Astronomy
    ,
    Volume 2, Edition 2, 262 pages, by Andis Kaulins.

  • Both volumes have the same cover except for the labels "Volume 1" viz. "Volume 2".
    The image on the cover was created using public domain space photos of Earth from NASA.

    -----

    Both book volumes contain the following basic book description:
    "Alice Cunningham Fletcher observed in her 1902 publication in the American Anthropologist
    that there is ample evidence that some ancient cultures in Native America, e.g. the Pawnee in Nebraska,
    geographically located their villages according to patterns seen in stars of the heavens.
    See Alice C. Fletcher, Star Cult Among the Pawnee--A Preliminary Report,
    American Anthropologist, 4, 730-736, 1902.
    Ralph N. Buckstaff wrote:
    "These Indians recognized the constellations as we do, also the important stars,
    drawing them according to their magnitude.
    The groups were placed with a great deal of thought and care and show long study.
    ... They were keen observers....
    The Pawnee Indians must have had a knowledge of astronomy comparable to that of the early white men."
    See Ralph N. Buckstaff, Stars and Constellations of a Pawnee Sky Map,
    American Anthropologist, Vol. 29, Nr. 2, April-June 1927, pp. 279-285, 1927.
    In our book, we take these observations one level further
    and show that megalithic sites and petroglyphic rock carving and pictographic rock art in Native America,
    together with mounds and earthworks, were made to represent territorial geographic landmarks
    placed according to the stars of the sky using the ready map of the starry sky
    in the hermetic tradition, "as above, so below".
    That mirror image of the heavens on terrestrial land is the "Sky Earth" of Native America,
    whose "rock stars" are the real stars of the heavens, "immortalized" by rock art petroglyphs, pictographs,
    cave paintings, earthworks and mounds of various kinds (stone, earth, shells) on our Earth.
    These landmarks were placed systematically
    in North America, Central America (Meso-America) and South America
    and can to a large degree be reconstructed as the Sky Earth of Native America."

    Our Websites and Blogs

    3D Printing and More 99 is not 100 Aabecis AK Photo Blog Ancient Egypt Weblog Ancient Signs (the book) Ancient World Blog AndisKaulins.com Anthropomorphic Design Archaeology Travel Photos (blog) Archaeology Travel Photos (Flickr) Archaeo Pundit Arts Pundit Astrology and Birth Baltic Coachman Bible Pundit Biotechnology Pundit Book Pundit Chronology of the Ancient World Computer Pundit DVD Pundit Easter Island Script Echolat edu.edu Einstein’s Voice Energy Environment and Climate Blog Etruscan Bronze Liver of Piacenza EU Laws EU Legal EU Pundit FaceBook Pundit Gadget Pundit Garden Pundit Golf Pundit Google Pundit Gourmet Pundit Hand Proof HousePundit Human Migrations Idea Pundit Illyrian Language Indus Valley Script Infinity One : The Secret of the First Disk (the game) Jostandis Journal Pundit Kaulins Genealogy Blog Kaulinsium Kiel & Kieler Latvian Blog LawPundit.com Law Pundit Blog LexiLine.com LexiLine Group Lexiline Journal Library Pundit Lingwhizt LinkedIn Literary Pundit Magnifichess Make it Music Maps and Cartography Megalithic World Megaliths Blog Megaliths.net Minoan Culture Mutatis Mutandis Nanotech Pundit Nostratic Languages Official Pundit Phaistos Disc Pharaonic Hieroglyphs Photo Blog of the World Pinterest Prehistoric Art Pundit Private Wealth Blog PunditMania Quanticalian Quick to Travel Quill Pundit Road Pundit Shelfari Sky Earth Drones Sky Earth Native America SlideShare (akaulins) Sport Pundit Star Pundit Stars Stones and Scholars (blog) Stars Stones and Scholars (book) Stonehenge Pundit The Enchanted Glass Twitter Pundit UbiquitousPundit Vision of Change VoicePundit WatchPundit Wearable Technology Wizard WeTechWi Wine Pundit Word Pundit xistmz YahooPundit zistmz