I “discovered” the Running Dogs Theory back in 2006.  I read somewhere (I don’t even recall where I read it) something to the effect that an underdog who outrushed their opponent will cover the spread 66.67% of the time (2 out of 3 times). I started tracking the theory and sure enough it was true.

I started working on ways to try and predict beforehand which teams in the role of underdog would most likely outrush their opponent. After some tweaking I introduced the theory and my methodology to GoSooners for the 2006 bowl season.

The Legend of the Bowl Running Dog 

Thus began the legend of the bowl running dogs. From the 2006-07 thru the 2009-10 bowl season (4 bowl seasons) the potential Bowl Running Dogs went a combined 33-16 = 67.35%.

However, over the next three bowl seasons the potential Bowl Running Dogs went a combined 17-17 = 50%.

So after 7 bowl seasons, the potential Bowl Running Dogs were a combined 50-33 = 60.24%. Then the 2014-15 bowl season happened, and the legend of the Bowl Running Dog was taken to completely different level.

We were able to identify 15 Potential Bowl Running Dogs and they ended up going 13-2 ATS (11-4 SU). The actual Bowl Running Dogs performed even better, going 16-2 ATS & 15-3 SU.

Identifying Potential Running Dogs 

The manner in which I identify potential running dogs is fairly easy. I take a team’s average yards per rush offensively/defensively (I personally eliminate all games vs FCS opponents) and subtract their opponent’s yards per rush offensive/defensive season average. Do this for both teams and whoever has the higher number is statistically the better running team. If that team happens to be an underdog, then they are considered a potential running dog.

Let me give you an example from this past bowl season (2014-15). Wisconsin was a 6.5 point underdog against Auburn in the Outback Bowl.

I had Wisconsin averaging 7.02 yards per rush vs teams that allowed 4.73 yards per rush (+2.32), and defensively I had them allowing 3.56 yards per rush vs teams that averaged 4.24 yards per rush (+.67). Giving the Badgers an impressive +3.00 average yard advantage (per rush offensively/defensively) over their opponents.

I had Auburn averaging 5.62 yards per carry vs teams that allowed 4.21 yards per carry (+1.41), and defensively they allowed 4.20 yards per carry vs teams that averaged 4.49 yards per carry (+.29). Giving War Eagle a solid +1.70 average yard advantage (per rush offensively/defensively) over their opponents.

Based on these numbers, Wisconsin held a +1.30 yards per rush advantage over Auburn and clearly qualified as a Potential Running Dog (PRD).

In actuality Wisconsin was in fact the running dog, outrushing Auburn by 181 yards (400 yards to Auburn’s 219), and winning the game outright in OT, 34 to 31.

Point of Attack 

Even in the spread-happy world of college football, running the ball and stopping the run is always a great recipe for covering, regardless of whether a team is favored or is an underdog. A lot of these so called “running” teams usually lack “flash and flair,” and the public undersells them as a result. A lot of value can be found in these matchups if you can identify them correctly.

Last year’s CFB Playoffs was the perfect example of the advantages in having a good running game/run defense. Ohio State owned the point of attack against both Alabama ad Oregon, they consistently moved the chains, they forced punts (holding Alabama & Oregon juggernauts to 4 of 25 on third downs!), they lifted a trophy.

In Closing 

Moving forward, it seems like college football is locked into a tug-of-war between the fast break style that can improve a program but not win a national championship… versus the more classic style of play where the point of attack still determines a champion. The best from both styles will keep banging heads in the postseason. For now, only one approach wins championships. 

The point being, there are many reasons to consider wagering on these type of teams, especially in the role of underdog.

Identifying the potential running dog is not easy, especially early in the season with only a small statistical sample-size to work with. But once you are able to start identifying underdogs that have the ability to outrush their opponent, you will find them covering point spreads at a very impressive rate.

GoSooners summarized it best — open up your paper the day after the game and look at the box scores. Show me a dog that outrushes their favored opponent, and I’ll show you about 80% winners (ATS) without even having to look at the final score.