LSU vs Bama and "homefield advantage".....

[SLUdog]

if you are betting based on Bama's homefield advantage in this game, then you have NOT studied the history of this series. Now since the home team has won the last 2 games, perhaps it will mean something, but historically that has meant nothing in this rivalry. In the last 30 years the away team has won approximately 70% of the time.

 

[Coach34]

only 1 visiting team has won- that was the year LSU was rebuilding- and that game went to OT still<div>
</div><div>as I told some friends- I think LSU has the best overall team- but if I have to put my money on it- I have to go with Bama at home 20-16</div><div>
</div><div>it's going to be a great game
<div>
</div><div>
</div></div>

 

[MSDawg34]

The home team has won, but we should look back to when these players weren't around.. Not sure I follow your logic, even though there is no logic because those stats never mean anything from year to year

 

[SLUdog]

and trends. The point is that home field advantage is not an historical indicator of the winner in this rivalry traditionally. A trend of the last 30 years should not be overlooked. However, it's like the stock market, past performance is not necessarily indicative in every case.

 

[PONYfun]

The stock market is, in theory, informationally efficient. Without really getting into it, that means those "trends" are already taken into consideration, and don't mean ****. Of course, some people will argue against that and rely heavily on past performance. Which is what you are doing with this statistical football data. I believe, in both cases, historical ststistics count for naught. I definitely wouldn't rely on that if betting money. But to each his own.