Use a variety of sources for a variety of purposes, but the process is always the same.
1. Who is going to win. While it may seem strange to say, my experience is that most if not all degenerate gamblers run into trouble right here. Because they're always looking for the big score, or at the very least something bigger than chalk, they will ignore the obvious. Example, Louisville is going to beat Kentucky this evening. With a +23 line only the truly deranged likely to lay bet on ML taking Kentucky. So if Kentucky isn't going to win their logic turns to well they keep it close, less than 24. Trouble with this logic is the margin between 21 and 23.5 is a FG and if a team is capable of putting up a 3 TD margin I don't like the odds that on the 4th trip down they settle for a FG and my money.
Not to say I dont or wont bet dogs but when i take a dog its because i can see them winning straight up and am using pts as a hedge.
2. Once i have a line on who should win i'll begin to look for reasons why they may not hold true to form. Injuries, suspensions, philosophy matchups, weather. These come from a variety of readily available media sources.
3. Finally i'll plug in any trends I find relevant to particular game. Heads up records may or may not be of any relevance. I dont put much stock in them if teams rarely meet. Say Duke's 0-4 against Toledo all time but two havent played one another in 15 yrs, what benefit is it to me. ATS can also be meaningless at times. One rule of thumb i use is a new coach starts with a fresh slate. But there's a qualifier as always, teams with new head coachs generally take longer to round into form.
Finally i agree with u Big that above link is a good source for alot of the grunt work of matchups. I also recommend that people find a good database for other historical numbers S fox misses.
