Top 25 1st Half Fade Plays

[QUOTE=skrtelfan;17466]The idea of fading hot, public teams can certainly have merit, as can the idea of fading teams who may be in a look-ahead position, but my point was that in that specific game, you're taking the #3 team who's won 22 out of 25 this year, including 13 of their last 15, facing the #19 team who had lost 4 out of 5 before going on a 4 game winning streak. They broke that losing streak by beating Seton Hall, who are pretty mediocre, and Robert Morris, from a small enough conference their games aren't even lined, and Pittsburgh would have surely been favored by at least 20 if there was a line on that game. Lumping in a 22-3 team as "cold" because they lost their last game and putting a team not that far removed from a 1-4 run as "hot," not to mention describing them as "fat and happy" when they're facing the #3 team in the country, just doesn't make a lot of sense. As initially described, I thought OS meant he was fading Villanova and just missed the fact that they'd lost a game. It never even crossed my mind that a system could take the #3 team in the country on a 13-2/22-3 run because their opponent on a 5-5 run would be "fat and happy."[/QUOTE] Those are some good points, and the fat and happy was 0-2 for this game.

was msu considered a hot top 25 team??? i love the explanation of the system but for some games it seems as though its a judgement call on who is hot and who is not?? just curious bc i laid off osu msu and the dog goes 2 &0. wasnt a system play though. just trying to develop the criteria that OS follows bc it is good stuff this year

MSU had only won 2 in a row. From a logical perspective, considering motivational issues etc, I would be inclined to simply toss out any game involving two ranked teams. Even if MSU had won 3 in a row, it's hard to believe they'd be "fat and happy" and not motivated to beat the #9 team in the country, even with a big game @ Purdue on the horizon.

[QUOTE=skrtelfan;17479]MSU had only won 2 in a row. From a logical perspective, considering motivational issues etc, I would be inclined to simply toss out any game involving two ranked teams. Even if MSU had won 3 in a row, it's hard to believe they'd be "fat and happy" and not motivated to beat the #9 team in the country, even with a big game @ Purdue on the horizon.[/QUOTE] oh yeah I didn't even remember the title of our system as the thread is just top 25 fades not fat and happy. thanks for reminding me. no play on msu makes sense.

SO... this is fat and happy subtracting 2 top 25 teams playing each other? What have the results been so far? What happens when tournaments start?? Thanks for the info, just trying to understand what is being discussed.

It's probably going to be tough to get accurate records of this system because I've seen it quoted in a pretty large variety of ways. Some people used just AP rankings, some used any team that's top 25 in AP, ESPN, or the RPI, and there were various things done when two ranked teams faced each other. The initial idea proposed by Blogguy on the old LVA board a couple years ago was simply fading top 25 teams that had won 3 in a row and were double digit home favorites or any degree of road favorite. Then they expanded it to include any top 25 team that was favored. I have no idea how the system was expanded past that and there's too much discussion to sort through, but the focus of the discussion was teams that might reach a lull and look ahead to the March conference and NCAA tourneys, and have the proverbial "target over their heads" for the opponent. Those criteria wouldn't seem to apply to games like #3 Nova @ #19 Pitt or #9 OSU @ #11 MSU (and given the initial parameters, Pitt was the underdog so Nova would have been a pass even if they weren't ranked.)