Teams that have lost a lot of players are often written off for college football gambling dead before the season even begins. In NCAA football gambling, one quickly learns to question such conventional “college football gambling wisdom” as what good are returning starters if they are bad players on a bad team.
His upcoming college football gambling season, when you read the preseason publications or the tout sheets for the first couple of weeks, is aware and skeptical when the returning starter angle is used.
A far more useful angle is to read the past college football gambling history of that program, particularly if they are under the same head coach, and study whether or not in the past they have been able to handle player turnover or, for that matter, do well with a lot of returning starters.
The college football gambling graveyard is full of teams and bankrolls killed off on the returning starter angle. It is also full of a lot of bankrolls that were lost y foolish gamblers that ignored all other criteria and opposed strong programs with weaker ones, based solely on the returning starter angle.
In fact, when on the eternal quest for NCAA college football gambling value, your traditional power/name brand teams often are at their best when they are young and touted as “rebuilding” with new and inexperienced players.
More often than not, what these programs are really doing is RELOADING and the smart and savvy gambler that is bigger picture oriented can get ahead of the masses by backing these winning programs early, when everyone else has written them off from college football gambling.
Another way to look at this is what if you see a college football gambling program that is a loser year after year and is coming off yet another losing campaign from the prior season but they have nearly all of their players returning? Remember, this program has a track record of losing year after year.
They lost last year with this same group of players. They will face the same traditional winners that they faced in the past. Doesn't it make sense to ask why anything is really going to change just because a bad team of bad players is one more year experienced at losing?