Page 1 of 1

THE EARLY LINE URI VS ST. JOES

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 1:56 pm
by luke
The line is up for this game. Vegas has it as URI - 9. With a good performance here
the Rams could easily cover the spread. But a poor performance could result in a close loss.
I'm looking for another good game and a double digit win.

Re: THE EARLY LINE URI VS ST. JOES

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 4:04 pm
by TruePoint
Just win covering 9 at hawk hill is always a tough thing, even when Joe is down.

Re: THE EARLY LINE URI VS ST. JOES

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:00 pm
by luke
Very true TP, but they are now even without Kimble and not playing well at all.

Re: THE EARLY LINE URI VS ST. JOES

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:48 pm
by ramster
They have lost 8 straight games

Re: THE EARLY LINE URI VS ST. JOES

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 11:57 pm
by reef
I was going to guess -8

I will take SJU and hope Rhody wins by less than 9

Re: THE EARLY LINE URI VS ST. JOES

Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 11:36 am
by URIGONZO
Line bounced from 8.5 to 9 -115 back down to 8.....interesting

Re: THE EARLY LINE URI VS ST. JOES

Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:26 pm
by URIGONZO
Money back on Rhody, line back to 8.5.

Re: THE EARLY LINE URI VS ST. JOES

Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 5:53 pm
by luke
You can find spreads anywhere from - 8 up to - 9. Tough call, but I think rhody is
on a roll. Give the points, could be a surprising blowout in Philly.

Re: THE EARLY LINE URI VS ST. JOES

Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 6:06 pm
by ramster
Luke,
Usually the RPI live forecast is very close to the Vegas line but this game it is only URI -6.5

So not too surprised it has come down a bit. Wonder if senior night fires up the Hawks? But it seems we have so so so much to play for we could very well blow them out. Our bench is strong too while their bench has weakened

For the Davidson game it's URI -7.3

Re: THE EARLY LINE URI VS ST. JOES

Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 9:16 pm
by RhodyRams12
Easy money

Re: THE EARLY LINE URI VS ST. JOES

Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2017 12:01 am
by reef
Hopefully URI will be -10 v Davidson