Thursday, November 17, 2016

Week 10 Picks




*Sorry for the reduced posting lately. The election and its aftermath has had me busy at work, especially since I was the only mainstream media columnist to predict a Trump victory.

I went 2-1 straight up last week and 3-0 against the spread to bring my season totals to 26-12 straight up and 24-14 ATS.

Penn -10 1/2 at Cornell

The Quakers aren't going to lose focus now, even though I think the Big Red have enough offense to make it closer. In the end, Penn will cover.


Harvard -12 1/2 vs. Yale

Yale doesn't have much left in the tank, not even for The Game.


Dartmouth +14 1/2 at Princeton

I think the Big Green has enough fight left in them to make this closer. But the Tigers will still win.






8 comments:

Peter Stevens said...

Our lack of success this season goes beyond tHe limitations of our players. It extends to our coaches, particularly our O And D coordinators.
I won't dwell on our offensive woes. they have already been well chronicled in this space. As for he defense, I'm of view that the DC's failure to make meaningful adjustments in second half of Cornell game contributed significantly to the loss. It. Was clear from the outset of game that our D line was unable to generate any meaning full pass rush or put pressure on the QB- who was very good. The result was that he had time to throw all over the field which he did with great success. And we were lucky that there were 3 or so passes that the Cornell receivers flat out dropped. Why we didn't blitz more I don't know. I then felt certain that the DC would make thus adjustment in the second half. But te didn't-- at least not enough to have an impact. Guess what? The result was the same.

On the other hand, Cornell blitzed Hill quite a bit in 2nd half with great success. I recall at Keaton two times that Hill was sacked by CB blitzes.

oldlion said...

I respectfully disagree. Our coaches have done an outstanding job with a very undermanned roster of upperclassmen. We are giving regular playing time to around 15 freshmen. We just do not have the depth on the OL and DL. We are a much better team than we were a year ago but still need at least one and possibly two more recruiting classes to give us the athletes we need to play four winning quarters each week.

Charles Pace said...

Old lion can you be more specific about depth on the OL? They have been healthy and playing well all year.

alawicius said...

No question we had no pass rush...it was strange, especially after Harvard.

oldlion said...

By depth I mean that I still think we have a deficit in stoutness. I think the DL will be very good next year but we will need more help on the OL.

Charles Pace said...

The OL will be in good shape next year Old Lion. The only graduate from the line is LT. They will have another seasoned OL next year and already have capable back ups as #60 has proven in absence of #61. The OL has averaged approximately 150 yds per game rushing this season with exception of maybe 2 games and has protected well. Bagnoli will continue to bring in good ball players at ALL positions.

Chen has been very critical of the OL but when I look at the data/stats I'm perplexed to see his point. No worries the OL will be good again next year.

oldlion said...

OL was excellent today..We will miss Kendall. Four year starter who went through a tough first two years

Charles Pace said...

Thank you Old Lion. You are a class act!