If you would like to download the full TeamRankings.com Bowl Guide in PDF format, please click the link below. Please note that you will need Adobe Reader software to view this guide.

Download the Ultimate College Football Bowl Guide (printable e-book)

Bowl 34: BCS Title - Florida (-4.5) 24, Oklahoma 14

01.09.09

Win - Florida; Cover - Florida; Totals - UNDER 69.0

Our win pick: Florida - 10 confidence points [20-14, +350 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Florida - 25 confidence points [20-14, +368.1 pts]
Yahoo experts: Florida [21-13]

Our ATS pick: Florida - 1 star [17-16-1 total, 25-24-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Over - 4 stars [17-17 total, 38-38 stars]

Was it just us or did this one feel like a bit of a snooze to watch? We end bowl season with a correct winner and ATS pick, but drop a big over call, which we feared was in trouble as soon as the Sooners took the field with a deliberate plan to slow down their offense down and decrease the pace. Why, we're not quite so sure, because it certainly didn't work all that well.

Thus concludes a rather streaky and in the end, almost perfectly mediocre year for our bowl pick'em, ATS, and Totals picks, although five of our six most confident straight-up win picks did win their games. We've got a number of enhancements on tap for next year, which include:

1) Better reporting on the performance of up-to-date algorithmic predictions of our models. We "froze" our final opinions (the predictions we are tracking in this blog) back on 12/20, but as lines and information changed on various games, some algorithmic predictions changed significantly. Ball State - vs. Tulsa was a good example.) Although not important for Pick'em players, bettors are interested in the most recent projections.

2) Reporting on how all of our individual predictive models are doing, as well as our overall opinions that consider the results of all the models.

3) Correction of an "oopsie" in terms of comparing the performance of our picks to Yahoo! Pick'em users. As reported in this blog, it looks like our opinions performed slightly worse than the consensus opinions of Yahoo! users. However, our method of computing average confidence points for Yahoo! user consensus picks gave them an accidental boost whenever a favored team won. (Of course, most of the time favorites do win.) It's water under the bridge at this point, though.

4) More content, more powerful data, and better analysis tools! (Always the goal...)

We hope you found value in the college football BowlZone and please send any feedback or suggestions our way at support@teamrankings.com.

Bowl 33: GMAC - Tulsa (-2.5) 45, Ball State 13

01.07.09

Win - Tulsa; Cover - Tulsa; Totals - UNDER 70.5

Our win pick: Ball State - 27 confidence points [19-14, +340 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Ball State - 25.4 confidence points [19-14, +343.1 pts]
Yahoo experts: Tulsa [20-13]

Our ATS pick: Ball State - 1 star [16-16-1 total, 24-24-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 2 stars [17-16 total, 38-34 stars]

Our confident Ball State to win pick was unfortunately victimized by breaking information (including the departure of Ball State coach Brady Hoke) and changing lines; what was once a 67% win odds prediction by our Similar Games model had evaporated to 50.2% by game time. However, Yahoo! users were at a similar disadvantage of course when picks were due, so props to the Yahoo! experts for picking what was an upset back on 12/20. In absolute deluge during the second half (another X-factor), the Cardinals' poor run defense folded and their offense was nonexistent. However, we salvaged with a correct 2-star under call.

Bowl 32: Fiesta - Texas (-8) 24, Ohio State 21

01.06.09

Win - Texas; Cover - Ohio State; Totals - UNDER 52

Our win pick: Texas - 21 confidence points [19-13, +340 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Texas - 30.4 confidence points [19-13, +343.1 pts]
Yahoo experts: Texas [19-13]

Our ATS pick: Ohio State - 2 stars [16-15-1 total, 24-23-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 3 stars [16-16 total, 36-34 stars]

It came down to the wire, and from a competitive standpoint, it probably would have helped subscribers using our opinions for Bowl Pick'ems more if the Longhorns had lost, as the overwhelming majority of Yahoo! users (90%) picked Texas with incredibly high confidence levels. Our lower confidence point call is still something to feel good about, as this game was a lot closer than most people thought it would be, as our Similar Games Model projected. If only Buckeye QB Terrelle Pryor knew how to throw a football, the Buckeyes could have had it! However, we're happy to get all the calls right across the board -- winner, ATS, and totals picks all came through, and all with multiple stars.

Bowl 31: International - Connecticut (-7) 38, Buffalo 20

01.03.09

Win - Connecticut; Cover - Connecticut; Totals - OVER 51

Our win pick: Connecticut - 25 confidence points [18-13, +319 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Connecticut - 23.4 confidence points [18-13, +312.7 pts]
Yahoo experts: Connecticut [18-13]

Our ATS pick: Connecticut - 2 stars [15-15-1 total, 22-23-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 1 star [15-16 total, 33-34 stars]

UConn's rushing attack proved too much for the Bulls to handle, although a 100 yard interception return by the Huskies with 2 minutes left derailed a push on our under call. Our models had differing opinions on this game; the similar games model, which we tend to favor, came closest to predicting a a strong UConn victory. So we'll take the straight up pick and 2 star ATS win.

Bowl 30: Sugar - Utah 31, Alabama (-9.5) 17

01.03.09

Win - Utah; Cover - Utah; Totals - OVER 45

Our win pick: Alabama - 24 confidence points [17-13, +294 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Alabama - 29.9 confidence points [17-13, +289.3 pts]
Yahoo experts: Alabama [17-13]

Our ATS pick: Utah - 2 stars [14-15-1 total, 20-23-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Over - 2 stars [15-15 total, 33-33 stars]

The explosive start by the Utes and the final margin was a surprise, but we did think Utah had a decent shot; two of our three models gave Utah about 40% win odds, while the third, Average Scoring Margin, forecast a very close game. In retrospect, we probably went too high on the confidence points we assigned to the Crimson Tide, but they were still below the 29.8 average that a whopping 92% of Yahoo! users who picked Alabama gave them. We don't mind so much picking the wrong team to win in situations like this, especially when we get the ATS and totals pick both correct.

Bowl 29: Liberty - Kentucky 25, East Carolina (-3) 19

01.03.09

Win - Kentucky; Cover - Kentucky; Totals - OVER 41

Our win pick: East Carolina - 9 confidence points [17-12, +294 pts so far]
Yahoo users: East Carolina - 23.8 confidence points [17-12, +289.3 pts]
Yahoo experts: East Carolina [17-12]

Our ATS pick: Kentucky - 1 star [13-15-1 total, 18-23-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 3 stars [14-15 total, 31-33 stars]

Hallelujah, our miserable 0-9 ATS run is over. We were about to resort to voodoo and hire a witch doctor. We had low confidence in our pick of ECU to win, a good call as it came down to the wire and could have gone either way. Consequently, bowl pick'em players who used our straight-up opinions should benefit comparatively, as most Yahoo! users picked also ECU but assigned nearly 24 confidence points. It's tough seeing another strong totals call go the wrong way, but we've at least exorcised the ATS demons.

Bowl 28: Cotton - Mississippi 47, Texas Tech (-3.5) 34

01.03.09

Win - Mississippi; Cover - Mississippi; Totals - OVER 65.5

Our win pick: Texas Tech - 20 confidence points [17-11, +294 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Texas Tech - 28.5 confidence points [17-11, +289.3 pts]
Yahoo experts: Texas Tech [17-11]

Our ATS pick: Texas Tech - 1 star [12-15-1 total, 17-23-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 4 stars [14-14 total, 31-30 stars]

Despite a spread of less than two field goals, over 90% of Yahoo! users picked Texas Tech to win this game, and with extremely high confidence. Our models unanimously favored Tech to win as well, but with relatively lower confidence. Tech's inability to stop the Ole Miss rushing attack was its undoing; the Average Scoring Margin model had the Red Raiders pegged at 33.4 points, but Ole Miss blew away its points projection of around 30. That performance also handed us a crushing loss on a 4-star under pick. Ouch.

Bowl 27: Orange - Virginia Tech 20, Cincinnati (-2.5) 7

01.02.09

Win - Virginia Tech; Cover - Virginia Tech; Totals - UNDER 41

Our win pick: Cincinnati - 3 confidence points [17-10, +294 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Virginia Tech - 20.8 confidence points [17-10, +289.3 pts]
Yahoo experts: Virginia Tech [17-10]

Our ATS pick: Cincinnati - 1 star [12-14-1 total, 17-22-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 3 stars [14-13 total, 31-26 stars]

Our models saw this game as a toss up, but unfortunately for us, 52% of Yahoo! users picked Virginia Tech to win. So we coughed up over 20 confidence points and our lead is now down to under 5 points. We did score a nice 3-star under call on this one, and are on a 3-0 totals pick run, but our ATS opinions performance over the last several days is an abysmal 0-8. Good and bad runs happen, but we hope that one ends very soon.

Bowl 26: Rose - USC (-10) 38, Penn State 24

01.02.09

Win - USC; Cover - USC; Totals - OVER 44.5

Our win pick: USC - 17 confidence points [17-9, +294 pts so far]
Yahoo users: USC - 27.5 confidence points [16-10, +268.5 pts]
Yahoo experts: USC [16-10]

Our ATS pick: Penn State - 2 stars [12-13-1 total, 17-21-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Over - 1 star [13-13 total, 28-26 stars]

What a frustrating game. Yes, QB Sanchez was on fire for USC. Still, the Nittany Lions should have at least salvaged an ATS cover out of this one, but uncharacteristic penalties and turnovers at critical moments did them in. Shame on you Penn State...

Bowl 25: Gator - Nebraska 26, Clemson (-2.5) 21

01.02.09

Win - Nebraska; Cover - Nebraska; Totals - UNDER 55

Our win pick: Clemson - 13 confidence points [16-9, +277 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Clemson - 20 confidence points [15-10, +241 pts]
Yahoo experts: Clemson [15-10]

Our ATS pick: Clemson - 1 star [12-12-1 total, 17-19-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 1 star [12-13 total, 27-26 stars]

The public was pretty much split down the middle on this game, but a 20 point explosion by Nebraska in the 3rd quarter was too much for Clemson to overcome. Our algorithms were also split on this game; the Average Scoring Margin method correctly predicted a Nebraska upset, but our Similar Games model favored Clemson. Unfortunately, we sided with the wrong one, but did pick up a correct under pick.

Bowl 24: Capital One - Georgia (-9) 24, Michigan State 12

01.02.09

Win - Georgia; Cover - Georgia; Totals - UNDER 57

Our win pick: Georgia - 19 confidence points [16-8, +277 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Georgia - 25.5 confidence points [15-9, +241 pts]
Yahoo experts: Georgia [15-9]

Our ATS pick: Michigan State - 2 stars [12-11-1 total, 17-18-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: OVER - 2 stars [11-13 total, 26-26 stars]

We got the winner, but our ATS opinions are on a brutal 0-5 run which is no fun at all. We certainly though the Spartans would have more success against the Bulldog defense, but the tide turned dramatically after halftime.

Bowl 23: Outback - Iowa (-3.5) 31, South Carolina 10

01.02.09

Win - Iowa; Cover - Iowa; Totals - UNDER 42

Our win pick: Iowa - 14 confidence points [15-8, +258 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Iowa - 20.5 confidence points [14-9, +215.5 pts]
Yahoo experts: Iowa [14-9]

Our ATS pick: South Carolina - 1 star [12-10-1 total, 17-16-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: UNDER - 4 stars [11-12 total, 26-24 stars]

Looks like we should have sided with the Average Scoring Margin prediction method on this game, which was forecasting an Iowa blowout. Our other models thought the Gamecocks would keep it closer, but Iowa's defense dominated, not allowing a point until the 4th quarter. While we missed a one-star cover pick, we picked up a 4-star under call, so we'll take that trade.

Bowl 22: Chick-Fil-A - LSU 38, Georgia Tech (-4) 3

01.01.09

Win - LSU; Cover - LSU; Totals - UNDER 53

Our win pick: Georgia Tech - 28 confidence points [14-8, +244 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Georgia Tech - 21.5 confidence points [13-9, +195 pts]
Yahoo experts: Georgia Tech [13-9]

Our ATS pick: Georgia Tech - 3 stars [12-9-1 total, 17-15-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: OVER - 3 stars [10-12 total, 22-24 stars]

This may well have been the game from hell. Maybe it was too obvious. Georgia Tech had a solid edge both statistically and in our algorithmic models; LSU looked like a classic case of the overestimated brand name team having a down year; Georgia Tech was playing at home. Result: GT doesn't even score a touchdown, and worse yet, both teams combine for 3 points in the second half and skewer our over call, which was looking good at halftime. Excuse us while we drown our sorrows in free chicken biscuits.

Bowl 21: Insight - Kansas (-9.5) 42, Minnesota 21

01.01.09

Win - Kansas; Cover - Kansas; Totals - OVER 59

Our win pick: Kansas - 34 confidence points [14-7, +244 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Kansas - 23.5 confidence points [13-8, +195 pts]
Yahoo experts: Kansas [13-8]

Our ATS pick: Minnesota - 2 stars [12-8-1 total, 17-12-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: UNDER - 3 stars [10-11 total, 22-21 stars]

This was our #1 confidence pick of bowl season, and we're happy to see the Jayhawks come through with a win, resulting in our top six straight up picks going 5-1. The downside was losing both ATS and totals calls, both for multiple stars. Our models saw the Gophers as keeping this game within a touchdown; we expected them to limit Kansas to no more than 35 points, but the Minnesota D wilted on several long drives and the offense stalled after a strong start.

Bowl 20: Music City - Vanderbilt 16, Boston College (-5) 14

01.01.09

Win - Vanderbilt; Cover - Vanderbilt; Totals - UNDER 40.5

Our win pick: Boston College - 18 confidence points [13-7, +210 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Boston College - 21.8 confidence points [12-8, +171.5 pts]
Yahoo experts: Boston College [12-8]

Our ATS pick: Boston College - 1 star [12-7-1 total, 17-10-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: UNDER - 2 stars [10-10 total, 22-18 stars]

In retrospect, this game would have been a good contrarian pick on Vanderbilt, since a whopping 89% of Yahoo! users picked BC to win even though our models thought this game would be relatively close. Still, the algorithms we use were unanimous in forecasting BC as an ~6 point winner, so we stuck with the BC pick. At least we salvaged a 2-star under call from it.

Bowl 19: Sun - Oregon State (-1) 3, Pittsburgh 0

01.01.09

Win - Oregon State; Cover - Oregon State; Totals - UNDER 51

Our win pick: Oregon State - 8 confidence points [13-6, +210 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Oregon State - 17.1 confidence points [12-7, +171.5 pts]
Yahoo experts: Oregon State [12-7]

Our ATS pick: Oregon State - 1 star [12-6-1 total, 17-9-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: OVER - 3 stars [9-10 total, 20-18 stars]

Wow. Was that really a football game? This matchup featured two offenses that each average scoring about a touchdown more than their opponents typically yield...so much for stats! Besides the brutal over call, still a decent win to pick up. We gave up some confidence points to the Yahoo! user consensus picks, but a full 47% of Yahoo! Pick'em users had Pitt winning this game. Got the cover pick too; our opinions are now 12-6-1 ATS after a recent run.

Bowl 18: Armed Forces - Houston (-4) 34, Air Force 28

01.01.09

Win - Houston; Cover - Houston; Totals - UNDER 66

Our win pick: Houston - 11 confidence points [12-6, +202 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Houston - 16.2 confidence points [11-7, +154.4 pts]
Yahoo experts: Houston [11-7]

Our ATS pick: Houston - 1 star [11-6-1 total, 16-9-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: OVER - 1 star [9-9 total, 20-15 stars]

This one played out roughly as we expected, although it was interesting to see how much confidence the average Yahoo! user was staking on this game. Nearly 40% chose Air Force, with an average of 15.2 confidence points. Our lead over Yahoo! users in terms of confidence points has been narrowing, but stands at just under 48 points.

Bowl 17: Oregon (-1) 42, Oklahoma State 31

12.31.08

Win - Oregon; Cover - Oregon; Totals - UNDER 75

Our win pick: Oklahoma State - 26 confidence points [11-6, +191 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Oklahoma State - 18.2 confidence points [10-7, +138.2 pts]
Yahoo experts: Oklahoma State [10-7]

Our ATS pick: Oklahoma State - 2 stars [10-6-1 total, 15-9-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: OVER - 2 stars [9-8 total, 20-14 stars]

Yuck. We sensed we may in trouble with this game as the lines shifted to favor Oregon as start time neared, and indeed we were. Although Oklahoma State racked up 469 yards, it had trouble getting in the red zone and ended up below its season average for points, even though the Oregon defense usually allows opponents more points than they average. In retrospect, we probably should have given Oregon more credit for a favorable defensive matchup with the run-heavy OSU offense and strong offensive performances away from home this year. Interesting to see that over 80% of Yahoo! users and the experts picked Oklahoma State as well, but we took our lumps on this one.

Bowl 16: Texas - Rice (-2) 38, Western Michigan 14

12.31.08

Win - Rice; Cover - Rice; Totals - UNDER 73.5

Our win pick: Rice - 7 confidence points [11-5, +191 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Rice - 15.9 confidence points [10-6, +138.2 pts]
Yahoo experts: Rice [10-6]

Our ATS pick: Rice - 1 star [10-5-1 total, 15-7-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Over - 1 star [9-7 total, 20-12 stars]

The horrible Rice defense had the game of its collective life, which we definitely did not predict. On average the Rice D yields opponents about 7 points more than they typically score per game, yet it held the Bronco offense to nearly 14 points LESS than it averages. That 21 point swing made all the difference, as we expected Rice to score in the high 30s. We still got the straight up and ATS picks right, but yielded some confidence points to Yahoo! users and broke our hot streak on totals. (Fortunately we only had a 1-star call on the over.)

Bowl 15: Humanitarian - Maryland 42, Nevada (-2.5) 35

12.31.08

Win - Maryland; Cover - Maryland; Totals - OVER 61

Our win pick: Maryland - 1 confidence point [10-5, +184 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Maryland - 15.1 confidence points [9-6, +122.3 pts]
Yahoo experts: Maryland [9-6]

Our ATS pick: Maryland - 1 star [9-5-1 total, 14-7-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Over - 1 star [9-6 total, 20-11 stars]

Our models were conflicted on this game, so we made it our least confident pick and went with the underdog hoping the rest of the world would do the opposite and we might pick up an edge. No such luck as both Yahoo! users and experts hopped on the Terps as well, with a surprisingly high level of confidence. Consolation: both an ATS win and a totals win, though.

Bowl 14: Alamo - Missouri (-14) 30, Northwestern 23

12.30.08

Win - Missouri; Cover - Northwestern; Totals - UNDER 66

Our win pick: Missouri - 23 confidence points [9-5, +183 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Missouri - 20.7 confidence points [8-6, +107.2 pts]
Yahoo experts: Missouri [8-6]

Our ATS pick: Northwestern - 3 stars [8-5-1 total, 13-7-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 4 stars [8-6 total, 19-11 stars]

We had a lot riding on this game, including a 3 star cover pick and a 4 star under pick, and after a somewhat wild ride all of them came through. Our models all indicated that 14 points was too high an amount for Missouri to be favored, and the Tigers' offense (and QB Chase Daniel) stalled for most of the game. Overtime, however, did have us sweating the under pick. What just kills us, though, is hearing the good old announcers describe Missouri's pass defense as being "one of the worst in the nation". Never mind that the Big 12 features the best passing offenses in the nation and Missouri still ranked a better than average #63 nationally in yards allowed per pass; evidently those facts are irrelevant.

Bowl 13: Papajohns.com - Rutgers (-6) 29, NC State 23

12.30.08

Win - Rutgers; Cover - PUSH; Totals - UNDER 57.5

Our win pick: Rutgers - 31 confidence points [8-5, +160 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Rutgers - 15.6 confidence points [7-6, +86.5 pts]
Yahoo experts: Rutgers [7-6]

Our ATS pick: NC State - 1 star - PUSH [7-5-1 total, 10-7-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 2 stars [7-6 total, 15-11 stars]

The Scarlet Knights rounded out their season ending win streak in style, taking advantage of an NC State QB injury to come from behind and win their seventh game in a row. We thought the point spread looked very efficient for this game, and indeed it was. After a nice last couple games, our totals picks are back in the black, and we picked up a big confidence point win as well.

Bowl 12: Independence - LA Tech (-2.5) 17, Northern Illinois 10

12.30.08

Win - LA Tech; Cover - LA Tech; Totals - UNDER 46.5

Our win pick: Northern Illinois - 22 confidence points [7-5, +129 pts so far]
Yahoo users: SPLIT - 10.4 confidence points [6-6, +70.9 pts]*
Yahoo experts: LA Tech [6-6]

*Yahoo users went 50/50 on both teams and both sides assigned an average of 10.4 confidence points to the pick. Since we're nice guys, we are going to give Yahoo! users credit for a correct pick and all 10.4 confidence points. The math nerd in us says they only deserve 5.2 though!

Our ATS pick: Northern Illinois - 2 stars [7-5 total, 10-7 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 4 stars [6-6 total, 13-11 stars]

We are guilty of not giving LA Tech enough credit for a favorable matchup in this game; their rush defense took run-dependent NIU completely out of its offensive rhythm. Since our models don't do a great job accounting for specific playing style matchups, in retrospect we should have given LA Tech a greater edge and made this game one of our lower confidence picks. We lost the cover pick too, although we came through with a big 4-star under call. Still a tough game to swallow.

Bowl 11: Emerald - California (-10) 24, Miami 17

12.30.08

Win - California; Cover - Miami; Totals - UNDER 50.5

Our win pick: California - 30 confidence points [7-4, +129 pts so far]
Yahoo users: California - 14.7 confidence points [5-6, +60.5 pts]
Yahoo experts: California [5-6]

Our ATS pick: Miami - 2 stars [7-4 total, 10-5 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Over - 3 stars [5-6 total, 9-11 stars]

A lot of folks thought Miami was going to get killed in this game, what with a pseudo-home game for Cal and a run of Miami player suspensions, but it wasn't decided until the final minutes. Our similar games model nailed it, predicting a Cal victory by 7. Although we're on a bit of a totals pick slump, we've opened up a 68.5 confidence point lead on Yahoo! users and are 10-5 ATS on a stars basis so far.

Bowl 10: Meineke - West Virginia (-2.5) 31, North Carolina 30

12.30.08

Win - West Virginia; Cover - North Carolina; Totals - OVER 47

Our win pick: North Carolina - 2 confidence points [6-4, +99 pts so far]
Yahoo users: West Virginia - 10.6 confidence points [4-6, +45.8 pts]
Yahoo experts: West Virginia [4-6]

Our ATS pick: North Carolina - 1 star [6-4 total, 8-5 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 2 stars [5-5 total, 9-8 stars]

We saw this game as a toss up, likely even closer than the Vegas lines anticipated (2.5 points), a projection that ended up being right on the money. We went with underdog UNC to win given that the game was closer to home for the Tar Heels, but the result really didn't matter given the 2 confidence points we assigned. So we lost a little ground to the Yahoo! experts and users (although over a third of Yahoo! users picked UNC to win), but did pick up a cover. The worst part was losing a 2-star under call, as both defenses had given up close to their per-game averages in points by the end of the first quarter alone. Great job guys.

Bowl 9: Champs Sports - Florida State (-7) 42, Wisconsin 13

12.30.08

Win - Florida State; Cover - Florida State; Totals - OVER 51

Our win pick: Florida State - 29 confidence points [6-3, +99 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Florida State - 14.5 confidence points [3-6, +35.2 pts]
Yahoo experts: Florida State [3-6]

Our ATS pick: Florida State - 2 stars [5-4 total, 7-5 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Over - 3 stars [5-4 total, 9-6 stars]

A solid win, and another case where the experts and public solidly favored FSU to win, but with less than average confidence. Our models showed this game as one of the strongest picks of bowl season, and FSU was in control pretty much the whole way. The strong call on the over was tighter, but thanks is due to the Badgers for a late touchdown!

Bowl 8: Motor City - Florida Atlantic 24, Central Michigan (-7) 21

12.27.08

Win - Florida Atlantic; Cover - Florida Atlantic; Totals - UNDER 68.5

Our win pick: Central Michigan - 32 confidence points [5-3, +70 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Central Michigan - 13.5 confidence points [2-6, +20.7 pts]
Yahoo experts: Central Michigan [2-6]

Our ATS pick: Central Michigan - 2 stars [4-4 total, 6-5 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 1 star [4-4 total, 6-6 stars]

Ouch, this one hurt. Looks like we should have put more stock in Howard Schnellenberger's undefeated bowl record than CMU's better overall performance and home-crowd advantage. It's hard to assess the impact of this loss until we see how our other high confidence point picks pan out; these are bowl games, after all, so no loss is a total shocker. (Our models gave Florida Atlantic win odds of about 30%.) Still, a correct call on the under is only partial consolation!

Bowl 7: Hawaii - Notre Dame (-2.5) 49, Hawaii 21

12.25.08

Win - Notre Dame; Cover - Notre Dame; Totals - OVER 49

Our win pick: Notre Dame - 4 confidence points [5-2, +70 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Hawaii - 9.9 confidence points [2-5, +20.7 pts]
Yahoo experts: Hawaii [2-5]

Our ATS pick: Hawaii - 1 star [4-3 total, 6-3 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 3 stars [3-4 total, 5-6 stars]

We went back and forth on this one, but as we adjusted our predictive models to better incorporate bowl game scenarios, Notre Dame emerged as the clearer pick to win. However, largely because of the home game location for Hawaii, a team that recently played Cincinnati (a much better team than ND) close in Honolulu, we thought this would be a tight game and hedged a bit with a very low confidence point assignment and a one-star ATS pick of Hawaii. So we're happy that we got the straight up pick right while Yahoo! users and experts again got it wrong, but didn't gain much from it. We really paid the price with our 3-star under pick, though, which got crushed. If you predicted that the hapless Notre Dame offense would all of a sudden turn into a Big 12-looking passing machine, more power to you!

Bowl 6: Poinsettia - TCU (-3.5) 17, Boise State 16

12.24.08

Win - TCU; Cover - Boise State; Totals - UNDER 46

Our win pick: TCU - 12 confidence points [4-2, +66 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Boise State - 10.1 confidence points [2-4, +20.7 pts]
Yahoo experts: Boise State [2-4]

Our ATS pick: TCU - 1 star [4-2 total, 6-2 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 3 stars [3-3 total, 5-3 stars]

It was too close for much comfort, but we'll take the end result. Vegas lines favored TCU in this game while the Yahoo! users and experts favored Boise State; our models correctly sided with Vegas. While we had little faith in TCU covering the points, we had a big call on the under in this game, which featured two very strong defenses, and it came through by a significant margin (33 scored vs. totals line of 46). End result: our win picks (4-2) have extended their lead over Yahoo! users (2-4) to over 45 confidence points after six games and we are 6-2 and 5-3 respectively on a star basis with our ATS and totals picks.

Bowl 5: New Orleans - Southern Miss 30, Troy (-4.5) 27

12.24.08

Win - Southern Miss; Cover - Southern Miss; Totals - OVER 54

Our win pick: Troy - 15 confidence points [3-2, +54 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Troy - 8.7 confidence points [2-3, +20.7 pts]
Yahoo experts: Troy [2-3]

Our ATS pick: Southern Miss - 1 star [4-1 total, 6-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 1 star [2-3 total, 2-3 stars]

This game was tough to watch; it looked like Troy was in control for a while in the second half, but credit is due to the Eagles for fighting back and never letting the game get away from them. We actually thought this game was going to be fairly close, as evidenced by our pick of Southern Miss to cover, which they did, although by a bit too many points for our liking! In the end, we still had decent confidence Troy would carry the day and so this game represents our worst "loss" so far from a straight-up confidence points perspective. However, our benchmarks (the Yahoo! users and experts) also had the Trojans, which helps soothe the sting.

Bowl 4: Las Vegas - Arizona (-3) 31, BYU 21

12.21.08

Win - Arizona; Cover - Arizona; Totals - UNDER 62

Our win pick: Arizona - 16 confidence points [3-1, +54 pts so far]
Yahoo users: BYU - 10.8 confidence points [2-2, +20.7 pts]
Yahoo experts: BYU [2-2]

Our ATS pick: Arizona - 3 stars [3-1 total, 5-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Over - 1 star [2-2 total, 2-2 stars]

Someone asked us on ESPN radio in Bakersfield, CA last week why in the world Arizona was favored by the Vegas lines to win this game, and we had to admit it was befuddling at first glance. On paper, in almost every stat category, BYU seemed to have an edge, and the Cougars were 2-1 in this very same bowl over the last three years. 81% of Yahoo! users picked BYU to win this game; after all, the Cougars were "ranked" (puke) and the Wildcats weren't, and BYU had a much better record. However, our ratings saw Arizona as a team with a better schedule strength and stronger predictive power rating, which is key for comparing teams from strong vs. weak conferences. Our similar games predictive model also indicated that teams like Arizona historically have performed well in these types of matchups. So rack up a big win here, including a 3-star cover, our strongest of the bowl season. At the conclusion of the first day of bowl games, our picks are now up by 33.3 confidence points over the Yahoo! user consensus.

Bowl 3: St. Petersburg - South Florida (-10.5) 41, Memphis 14

12.20.08

Win - South Florida; Cover - South Florida; Totals - UNDER 57

Our win pick: South Florida - 33 confidence points [2-1, +38 pts so far]
Yahoo users: South Florida - 13.6 confidence points [2-1, +20.7 pts]
Yahoo experts: South Florida [2-1]

Our ATS pick: South Florida - 1 star [2-1 total, 2-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 1 star [2-1 total, 2-1 stars]

This was a thoroughly satisfying all-around win. South Florida didn't do very well in the Big East this year, but records are close to irrelevant when two teams from vastly different conferences match up. Looking at the large disparity in confidence points assigned to this game between us (33) and Yahoo! users (13.6), it appears that most people's relative unfamiliarity with these teams led them to believe that South Florida was definitely the better team, but with little understanding of by just how much. (Hint: Look at our team and conference power ratings!) Still, we weren't so confident in a Bulls cover, as our margin of victory projections mostly hovered around +9 points, but went with them because of a cover odds projection of nearly 55%. We consider both our cover odds and win margin (also known as MOV or margin of victory) projections when making cover picks, but in toss up situations we usually go with cover odds.

Bowl 2: New Mexico - Colorado State 40, Fresno State (-2) 35

12.20.08

Win - Colorado State; Cover - Colorado State; Totals - OVER 61

Our win pick: Fresno State - 6 confidence points [1-1, +5 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Fresno State - 8 confidence points [1-1, +7.1 pts]
Yahoo experts: Fresno State [1-1]

Our ATS pick: Fresno State - 1 star [1-1 total, 1-1 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Under - 1 star [1-1 total, 1-1 stars]

Fitting we follow up an all-around winner with an all around loser...thought the Bulldogs had this one early on but their pathetic rush defense let C-State break for some huge game-breaking gains at the end. Our models saw this one as a toss-up, so no surprises; the game was close, again confirming our algorithms' hunches. If we go 6-4 with our 10 least confident picks, we'll be happy.

Bowl 1: Eagle Bank - Wake Forest (-3) 29, Navy 19

12.20.08

Win - Wake Forest; Cover - Wake Forest; Totals - OVER 44

Our win pick: Wake Forest - 5 confidence points [1-0, +5 pts so far]
Yahoo users: Wake Forest - 7.1 confidence points [1-0, +7.1 pts]
Yahoo experts: Wake Forest [1-0]

Our ATS pick: Wake Forest - 1 star [1-0 total, 1-0 stars]
Our Totals Pick: Over - 1 star [1-0 total, 1-0 stars]

A nice start to bowl season with a 3-way win, although it took a touchdown in the closing seconds for Wake to seal the cover. A hotly contested game until the end, so the low confidence point assignment informed by our models was a good call. Interesting that although Navy beat Wake in the regular season, more Yahoo users still picked Wake to win. Navy barely won that first game even with the help of an uncharacteristic six turnovers by Wake, so we put relatively little stock in that result; Navy got lucky.

Welcome to the BowlZone blog

12.19.08

Thanks for visiting the TeamRankings.com BowlZone! With bowl season about to get underway, we will use this page to blog about how our "final opinion" predictions are performing and also to discuss any other random topics of interest that cross our mind. (Feel free to email us questions at support@teamrankings.com.) Hope you enjoy the reading; it also should help convey some of our tactics and methods for breaking down games.

In addition to posting our records, we'll also be putting our straight-up picks head to head against the Yahoo! Sports Experts' picks and also against the "wisdom of the crowd" -- in this case, the consensus picks (with confidence points) of the Yahoo! Bowl Pick'em user community.