2023 College Football Week 5 Premium Picks Against the Spread

The 2023 College Football Week 5 will feature Notre Dame Vs Duke and LSU Vs Ole Miss.

We will have 6 Premium Picks against the spread this week!

Enjoy the free college football picks against the spread as well! 

Premium Picks are made public once the games are played.

Week 5


Friday, September 29th, 2023:

Louisville Vs NC State

Vegas: Louisville -3

College Football Game Picker: Louisville by 11.58

Louisville has a very balanced offense ranking 18th in rush offense and 19th in pass offense. The Cardinals put up 56 points this past weekend against Boston College. NC State struggled to win against a very poor Virginia team this past Friday. The only weakness that Louisville has had this year is its pass defense ranking 120th. NC State ranks 94th in pass offense and will not be able to expose the weakness. Look for Louisville to cover the spread in this one.


Saturday, September 30th, 2023:

Arizona St. Vs California

Vegas: California -10.5

College Football Game Picker: California by 27.43

California has played a difficult schedule to start the season but has still showed that it can move the ball with its 16th ranked rush offense and 30th ranked pass offense. The California pass offense should be able to expose the 102nd ranked pass defense of Arizona St. Arizona St. will struggle on offense against a better than average California defense. Vegas has undervalued California this year with a +6 against the spread average. Look for 46th ranked California to cover the spread in this one against 106th ranked Arizona St.


Saturday, September 30th, 2023:

Baylor Vs C. Florida

Vegas: C. Florida -10.5

College Football Game Picker: C. Florida by 20.63

Baylor has struggled this year out of the blocks going 1-3 with its only win against a FCS opponent. UCF has gone 3-1 with its only loss this past weekend at Kansas St in a shootout. UCF should be able to run the ball at will with its 3rd ranked rush offense going against the 104th ranked rush defense of Baylor. UCF has struggled with its pass defense, but Baylor only ranks 106th in pass offense. Baylor is -19 against the spread and has been seriously over valued by Vegas. Look for UCF to cover the spread in this one at home.


Saturday, September 30th, 2023:

S. Florida Vs Navy

Vegas: Navy -4

College Football Game Picker: S. Florida by 2.85

S. Florida followed up its close game with Alabama with a nice win against Rice 49-29. The strength of S. Florida’s offense has been its running game ranking 4th nationally. Navy has the 112th ranked rush defense which S, Florida should be able to expose. Navy will try to establish its running game but will be held in check by the 42nd ranked rush defense of S. Florida. Look for S. Florida to cover the spread in this one.


Saturday, September 30th, 2023:

N. Illinois Vs Toledo

Vegas: Toledo -12.5

College Football Game Picker: Toledo by 25.46

Toledo pretty much scored at will this past weekend but will be concentrating on its defense this week in practice after giving up two late touchdowns to a bad W. Michigan team. N. Illinois has been horrible on offense ranking 86th in rush offense and 119th in pass offense. Toledo should be able to run at will on N. Illinois with its 7th ranked rush offense going against the 109th ranked rush defense of N. Illinois. Look for Toledo to cover the spread in this one at home.


Saturday, September 30th, 2023:

San Diego St. Vs Air Force

Vegas: Air Force -9.5

College Football Game Picker: Air Force by 18.90

Air Force matches up well against San Diego St’s strengths and weaknesses. Air Force will have its 1st ranked rush offense going against the 115th ranked rush defense of San Diego St. Air Force has been very strong on defense ranking 7th in rush defense and 23rd in pass defense. San Diego has struggled on offense with its 94th ranked rush offense and 78th ranked pass offense. This will not be a good combination for San Diego St. Look for Air Force to cover the spread in this one at home.


 

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply