UNC +4 dogs. Go Bears!

https://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-sports/collegesports/2018/05/14/week-1-college-football-lines-texas-maryland-texas-tech-ole-miss-michigan-notre-dame

Now that sports gambling is legal, time for a lovely emotional hedge on this one. Take the points and buy yourself a Cal victory. Get compensated handsomely in the event of a loss. Or catch lightning in a bottle with cash and a Cal victory if they win by a field goal or less. Love it! Go Bears!

Was never able to bring myself to bet against Cal. Generally never bet on Cal games at all. But if you're going to emotionally hedge this one, I think the spread may edge up if you wait. We'll see.

But did they know we just lost Stovall and Watson?

bearsandgiants said:

---

Now that sports gambling is legal, time for a lovely emotional hedge on this one. Take the points and buy yourself a Cal victory. Get compensated handsomely in the event of a loss. Or catch lightning in a bottle with cash and a Cal victory if they win by a field goal or less. Love it! Go Bears!

---

Me too. I generally avoid betting on Cal games, but when I do, it's against Cal for the emotional hedge.

Cal is favored (-4)

any idea when the line for season wins comes out?

would be interesting to see what they put us at for that. 6.5?

Richmondbear2 said:

---

Cal is favored (-4)

---

yup. that's why you take unc. if we win, you essentially "bought" the cal win. totally worth it to start the season 1-0. If we lose, you at least win your bet. And if we win by 1, 2 or three, you also win your bet. If we win by 4, you're happy and you get your money back. You win either way. I'll gladly pay a few bucks to start the season on a winning streak. We likely won't be favored in many games though. Anyhow, it's my philosophy on this. Definitely eases the pain of a Cal loss.

bearsandgiants said:

---

Richmondbear2 said:

---

Cal is favored (-4)

---

yup. that's why you take unc. if we win, you essentially "bought" the cal win. totally worth it to start the season 1-0. If we lose, you at least win your bet. And if we win by 1, 2 or three, you also win your bet. If we win by 4, you're happy and you get your money back. You win either way. I'll gladly pay a few bucks to start the season on a winning streak. We likely won't be favored in many games though. Anyhow, it's my philosophy on this. Definitely eases the pain of a Cal loss.

---

UNC is a mess right now. They're kinda like the Cal of the ACC right now,i.e., the tarheels are going to get eaten up again this season. So the Bears should win their Berkeley match; if they don't, then Cal will have a very s#!%ty season themselves.

I don't bet on Cal but -4 is a small line. Cal returns 17 of 22 including the entire Oline. UnC returns 15 of 22 butbit is still unclear who the UNC QB will be.

Like Cal big here. As mentioned if Cal loses this game it likely does not bode well for the year.

UNC's top running back is Jordan Brown (ok, technically Jordon Brown). I wonder if he insisted on having a good blocking fullback before agreeing to enroll in a program not exactly known for their athletic or academic credentials.

We should win this game by 10 points if we don't crap our pants.

Slight crap of pants = win a close game
Total crap of pants = loss

TheSouseFamily said:

---

UNC's top running back is Jordan Brown (ok, technically Jordon Brown). I wonder if he insisted on having a good blocking fullback before agreeing to enroll in a program not exactly known for their athletic or academic credentials.

---

Check UNC out a bit more on your academic comment. Pretty well respected second level public along with Texas, Wisconsin, Washington. Yes, not a Cal, but.....

OdontoBear66 said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

UNC's top running back is Jordan Brown (ok, technically Jordon Brown). I wonder if he insisted on having a good blocking fullback before agreeing to enroll in a program not exactly known for their athletic or academic credentials.

---

Check UNC out a bit more on your academic comment. Pretty well respected second level public along with Texas, Wisconsin, Washington. Yes, not a Cal, but.....

---

I don't disagree that the university has a good academic reputation. I'm referring more so to the rampant academic fraud that's occurred over several decades to boost the athletics department, including the football team. It wasn't long ago that the football team was put on probation and had a bowl ban, leading to the firing of Butch Davis because of academic (and other) issues. Heck, the university had its entire accreditation suspended because of the depths of the problems there.

TheSouseFamily said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

UNC's top running back is Jordan Brown (ok, technically Jordon Brown). I wonder if he insisted on having a good blocking fullback before agreeing to enroll in a program not exactly known for their athletic or academic credentials.

---

Check UNC out a bit more on your academic comment. Pretty well respected second level public along with Texas, Wisconsin, Washington. Yes, not a Cal, but.....

---

I don't disagree that the university has a good academic reputation. I'm referring more so to the rampant academic fraud that's occurred over several decades to boost the athletics department, including the football team. It wasn't long ago that the football team was put on probation and had a bowl ban, leading to the firing of Butch Davis because of academic (and other) issues. Heck, the university had its entire accreditation suspended because of the depths of the problems there.

---

Agreed. Just wanted to differentiate. When our APR at Cal sucked it did not reflect on the quality of education at Cal..

hanky1 said:

---

We should win this game by 10 points if we don't crap our pants.

Slight crap of pants = win a close game
Total crap of pants = loss

---

So you're saying it depends

heartofthebear said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

We should win this game by 10 points if we don't crap our pants.

Slight crap of pants = win a close game
Total crap of pants = loss

---

So you're saying it depends

---

Why not also add category, diarrhea = lose convincingly

heartofthebear said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

We should win this game by 10 points if we don't crap our pants.

Slight crap of pants = win a close game
Total crap of pants = loss

---

So you're saying it depends

---

Depend Men's and/or Women's Maximum Absorbancy Underware are $9 off this month, for Cal fans and non...

TheSouseFamily said:

---

UNC's top running back is Jordan Brown (ok, technically Jordon Brown). I wonder if he insisted on having a good blocking fullback before agreeing to enroll in a program not exactly known for their athletic or academic credentials.

---

UNC's academics are very good. Just because you're not aware of that doesn't make them less so, just makes you more ignorant.

Uthaithani said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

UNC's top running back is Jordan Brown (ok, technically Jordon Brown). I wonder if he insisted on having a good blocking fullback before agreeing to enroll in a program not exactly known for their athletic or academic credentials.

---

UNC's academics are very good. Just because you're not aware of that doesn't make them less so, just makes you more ignorant.

---

You would be the absolute expert on ignorance. Although once again, you're wrong.

hanky1 said:

---

We should win this game by 10 points if we don't crap our pants.

Slight crap of pants = win a close game
Total crap of pants = loss

---

Based on what, exactly? Cal got kind of lucky in beating UNC last year in what was basically a toss-up game. And a first game of the season. UNC improved as the season progressed, while Cal regressed significantly. Both teams finished with losing records.

UNC's coach has a pretty strong winning track record over his tenure, while Cal's HC has yet to record a winning season as HC.

UNC's recruiting over the past 4 years has been significantly better than Cal's. So Cal returns more starters (but their losses are more significant and the returning talent is generally poor, and a lot of it still injured), but arguably less talent. Is this spread assuming Cal's star WR is back and at 100%? Because it's probably better than 50/50 he won't play in that game. There are a significant number of injured Cal players expected to return, and some of them won't (law of averages). Their back-ups have been less than impressive, especially on offense.

I have no idea if Cal has a reliable kicker who can get the ball through the uprights. I would assume this spread assumes Cal can make the relatively easy FGs which are a key part of Baldwin's offense (at least they were last season).

The game is played at home for Cal, and the Bears are being given HFA plus one point. Basically a toss-up on a neutral field. Given all the above, I'd say that's about right. This looks like an evenly matched game with Cal a slight favorite because they're at home. No reason to expect Cal to win by 10 or more, unless you're blinded by hope. Depending on injuries, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see UNC take this one and I'd call this game a coin flip.

Uthaithani said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

We should win this game by 10 points if we don't crap our pants.

Slight crap of pants = win a close game
Total crap of pants = loss

---

Based on what, exactly? Cal got kind of lucky in beating UNC last year in what was basically a toss-up game. And a first game of the season. UNC improved as the season progressed, while Cal regressed significantly. Both teams finished with losing records.

UNC's coach has a pretty strong winning track record over his tenure, while Cal's HC has yet to record a winning season as HC.

UNC's recruiting over the past 4 years has been significantly better than Cal's. So Cal returns more starters (but their losses are more significant and the returning talent is generally poor, and a lot of it still injured), but arguably less talent. Is this spread assuming Cal's star WR is back and at 100%? Because it's probably better than 50/50 he won't play in that game. There are a significant number of injured Cal players expected to return, and some of them won't (law of averages). Their back-ups have been less than impressive, especially on offense.

I have no idea if Cal has a reliable kicker who can get the ball through the uprights. I would assume this spread assumes Cal can make the relatively easy FGs which are a key part of Baldwin's offense (at least they were last season).

The game is played at home for Cal, and the Bears are being given HFA plus one point. Basically a toss-up on a neutral field. Given all the above, I'd say that's about right. This looks like an evenly matched game with Cal a slight favorite because they're at home. No reason to expect Cal to win by 10 or more, unless you're blinded by hope. Depending on injuries, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see UNC take this one and I'd call this game a coin flip.

---

After reading your analysis I change my mind. Cal by 16 points. Boom. I am no sunshine pumper and anyone who knows my posting history knows that I am not. But we win and win big.

Uthaithani said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

We should win this game by 10 points if we don't crap our pants.

Slight crap of pants = win a close game
Total crap of pants = loss

---

Based on what, exactly? Cal got kind of lucky in beating UNC last year in what was basically a toss-up game. And a first game of the season. UNC improved as the season progressed, while Cal regressed significantly. Both teams finished with losing records.

UNC's coach has a pretty strong winning track record over his tenure, while Cal's HC has yet to record a winning season as HC.

UNC's recruiting over the past 4 years has been significantly better than Cal's. So Cal returns more starters (but their losses are more significant and the returning talent is generally poor, and a lot of it still injured), but arguably less talent. Is this spread assuming Cal's star WR is back and at 100%? Because it's probably better than 50/50 he won't play in that game. There are a significant number of injured Cal players expected to return, and some of them won't (law of averages). Their back-ups have been less than impressive, especially on offense.

I have no idea if Cal has a reliable kicker who can get the ball through the uprights. I would assume this spread assumes Cal can make the relatively easy FGs which are a key part of Baldwin's offense (at least they were last season).

The game is played at home for Cal, and the Bears are being given HFA plus one point. Basically a toss-up on a neutral field. Given all the above, I'd say that's about right. This looks like an evenly matched game with Cal a slight favorite because they're at home. No reason to expect Cal to win by 10 or more, unless you're blinded by hope. Depending on injuries, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see UNC take this one and I'd call this game a coin flip.

---

UNC went 3-9. They were last in the ACC all by themselves with a record of 1-7. Early in the year, they beat Old Dominion, who went 5-7 and 3-5 in Conference USA. They won 2 of their last 3 games by beating 5-7, 3-5 Pitt and FCS opponent West Carolina.

Instead of acting like there is an equivalency in saying both teams had losing records, why don't you just put up the records. Maybe because 5-7 is not the same as 3-9.

Somehow, I'm just not thinking if Cal had UNC's season you'd be classifying it "improved as the season progressed". If we played our FCS opponent in the second to last game of the season like UNC, we would have won the last 2 of 3 also.

Some people have missed Amy around here. I guess it is good for them they've finally got a replacement.

Uthaithani said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

We HWe should win this game by 10 points if we don't crap our pants.

Slight crap of pants = win a close game
Total crap of pants = loss

---

Based on what, exactly? Cal got kind of lucky in beating UNC last year in what was basically a toss-up game. And a first game of the season. UNC improved as the season progressed, while Cal regressed significantly. Both teams finished with losing records.

UNC's coach has a pretty strong winning track record over his tenure, while Cal's HC has yet to record a winning season as HC.

UNC's recruiting over the past 4 years has been significantly better than Cal's. So Cal returns more starters (but their losses are more significant and the returning talent is generally poor, and a lot of it still injured), but arguably less talent. Is this spread assuming Cal's star WR is back and at 100%? Because it's probably better than 50/50 he won't play in that game. There are a significant number of injured Cal players expected to return, and some of them won't (law of averages). Their back-ups have been less than impressive, especially on offense.

I have no idea if Cal has a reliable kicker who can get the ball through the uprights. I would assume this spread assumes Cal can make the relatively easy FGs which are a key part of Baldwin's offense (at least they were last season).

The game is played at home for Cal, and the Bears are being given HFA plus one point. Basically a toss-up on a neutral field. Given all the above, I'd say that's about right. This looks like an evenly matched game with Cal a slight favorite because they're at home. No reason to expect Cal to win by 10 or more, unless you're blinded by hope. Depending on injuries, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see UNC take this one and I'd call this game a coin flip.

---

Boy that's a whole lot of wrong. Having read this carefully I believe the bolded text is the only correct statement I could find.

I am really surprised that Cal is not favored by more, perhaps U---------- is the oddsmaker?

Sebastabear said:

---

Uthaithani said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

HWe HWe should win this game by 10 points if we don't crap our pants.

Slight crap of pants = win a close game
Total crap of pants = loss

---

Based on what, exactly? Cal got kind of lucky in beating UNC last year in what was basically a toss-up game. And a first game of the season. UNC improved as the season progressed, while Cal regressed significantly. Both teams finished with losing records.

UNC's coach has a pretty strong winning track record over his tenure, while Cal's HC has yet to record a winning season as HC.

UNC's recruiting over the past 4 years has been significantly better than Cal's. So Cal returns more starters (but their losses are more significant and the returning talent is generally poor, and a lot of it still injured), but arguably less talent. Is this spread assuming Cal's star WR is back and at 100%? Because it's probably better than 50/50 he won't play in that game. There are a significant number of injured Cal players expected to return, and some of them won't (law of averages). Their back-ups have been less than impressive, especially on offense.

I have no idea if Cal has a reliable kicker who can get the ball through the uprights. I would assume this spread assumes Cal can make the relatively easy FGs which are a key part of Baldwin's offense (at least they were last season).

The game is played at home for Cal, and the Bears are being given HFA plus one point. Basically a toss-up on a neutral field. Given all the above, I'd say that's about right. This looks like an evenly matched game with Cal a slight favorite because they're at home. No reason to expect Cal to win by 10 or more, unless you're blinded by hope. Depending on injuries, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see UNC take this one and I'd call this game a coin flip.

---

Boy that's a whole lot of wrong. Having read this carefully I believe the bolded text is the only correct statement I could find.

---

More correct statements.....

HFA is generally worth three points. Therefore, the game is "basically a toss-up on a neutral field".

Also, regarding recruiting, here are Rivals rankings for the last four years:

2015 UNC 28 Cal 29
2016 UNC 22 Cal 27
2017 UNC 30 Cal 75
2018 UNC 23 Cal 44

Measured cumulatively, I would suggest that UNC's recruiting has been "significantly better" than Cal over the last four years.

In summary, I do agree with the notion that the game is evenly matched with Cal a slight favorite because they are playing at home. Last year, few people thought Cal would go into Chapel Hill and walk away a winner. This year, it would not surprise me if Carolina turned the tables and upset the Bears. I think Cal will win but I anticipate a close game.

Quite honestly I think we crush them. Lazy culture there at UNC on an opener despite the revenge factor. Closer game against BYU the following week but a win there too. It's more about Wilcox and how his team seems to play situationally. Which is to say it plays young (slow starter) but at it's best when it's back is against the wall.

Update:

Cal has edged up to a 5.5 point favorite at the site I look at. I think it would be even a bit more if the game time was a more difficult one for an east coast team (like 7:30pm) as it was for Cal when the Bears played at UNC (noon local, 9am Pacific I think).

Nervous - we need this one. Hopefully the home-field advantage and long travel for the Tarheels helps us.

Uthaithani said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

BWe should win this game by 10 points if we don't crap our pants.

Slight crap of pants = win a close game
Total crap of pants = loss

---

Based on what, exactly? Cal got kind of lucky in beating UNC last year in what was basically a toss-up game. And a first game of the season. UNC improved as the season progressed, while Cal regressed significantly. Both teams finished with losing records.

UNC's coach has a pretty strong winning track record over his tenure, while Cal's HC has yet to record a winning season as HC.

UNC's recruiting over the past 4 years has been significantly better than Cal's. So Cal returns more starters (but their losses are more significant and the returning talent is generally poor, and a lot of it still injured), but arguably less talent. Is this spread assuming Cal's star WR is back and at 100%? Because it's probably better than 50/50 he won't play in that game. There are a significant number of injured Cal players expected to return, and some of them won't (law of averages). Their back-ups have been less than impressive, especially on offense.

I have no idea if Cal has a reliable kicker who can get the ball through the uprights. I would assume this spread assumes Cal can make the relatively easy FGs which are a key part of Baldwin's offense (at least they were last season).

The game is played at home for Cal, and the Bears are being given HFA plus one point. Basically a toss-up on a neutral field. Given all the above, I'd say that's about right. This looks like an evenly matched game with Cal a slight favorite because they're at home. No reason to expect Cal to win by 10 or more, unless you're blinded by hope. Depending on injuries, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see UNC take this one and I'd call this game a coin flip.

---

I studied what you wrote....and I like the contrarian view which I assume was made just for the sake of argument
But c'mon, You really wouldn't bet against Cal -a program, staff, and players who fully expect a bowl game, loaded with veteran starters, in their home opener with an improving defense, returning QB and RB, a corps of excellent receivers, and a veteran offensive line against a school coming off a 3-9 season, different time zone, only known for basketball and that wears light blue?

And won't Cal be wearing UA uniforms for the first time? Can't wait!

So what time will the game be?

XXXBEAR said:

---

Uthaithani said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

BWe should win this game by 10 points if we don't crap our pants.

Slight crap of pants = win a close game
Total crap of pants = loss

---

Based on what, exactly? Cal got kind of lucky in beating UNC last year in what was basically a toss-up game. And a first game of the season. UNC improved as the season progressed, while Cal regressed significantly. Both teams finished with losing records.

UNC's coach has a pretty strong winning track record over his tenure, while Cal's HC has yet to record a winning season as HC.

UNC's recruiting over the past 4 years has been significantly better than Cal's. So Cal returns more starters (but their losses are more significant and the returning talent is generally poor, and a lot of it still injured), but arguably less talent. Is this spread assuming Cal's star WR is back and at 100%? Because it's probably better than 50/50 he won't play in that game. There are a significant number of injured Cal players expected to return, and some of them won't (law of averages). Their back-ups have been less than impressive, especially on offense.

I have no idea if Cal has a reliable kicker who can get the ball through the uprights. I would assume this spread assumes Cal can make the relatively easy FGs which are a key part of Baldwin's offense (at least they were last season).

The game is played at home for Cal, and the Bears are being given HFA plus one point. Basically a toss-up on a neutral field. Given all the above, I'd say that's about right. This looks like an evenly matched game with Cal a slight favorite because they're at home. No reason to expect Cal to win by 10 or more, unless you're blinded by hope. Depending on injuries, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see UNC take this one and I'd call this game a coin flip.

---

I studied what you wrote....and I like the contrarian view which I assume was made just for the sake of argument
But c'mon, You really wouldn't bet against Cal -a program, staff, and players who fully expect a bowl game, loaded with veteran starters, in their home opener with an improving defense, returning QB and RB, a corps of excellent receivers, and a veteran offensive line against a school coming off a 3-9 season, different time zone, only known for basketball and that wears light blue?

And won't Cal be wearing UA uniforms for the first time? Can't wait!

---

Really well said. Defense is our thing and we will demonstrate our strength all season. Although we finished 5-7 last year, the final two games were exceedingly close losses. One of the games was on the road in Pasadena, the other in Palo Alto. The difference could reasonably be attributed to home field advantage to the opponent. Our record from last season may be deceptive to those looking from the outside.

Also, I think the oddsmakers have fooled us some here. They've chosen a spread which may incite betting by both schools. Isn't that what Vegas wants?

9 pm