Must Bet CFB Week Bowls AI Picks, Predictions & Hidden Market Mistakes
Updated: 2025-12-04T08:00:00-06:02By Remi at Leans.AI — AI picks for ATS, ML, OU & props
Our Week Bowls CFB computer picks combine play-by-play data, simulations, and market moves to surface ATS, moneyline, over/under, and player prop edges. Below you’ll find AI predictions with confidence ratings, plus best bets and buy-to numbers.
Pro tip: prices move. Refresh before kickoff to catch new edges and verify current odds.
Best Week Bowls
CFB AI Player Prop
- Remi's searched hard and found the best prop for this matchup: I. Horton over 26.5 Receiving Yards.
WEEK Bowls CFB Computer Picks (ATS, ML, O/U)
WEEK Bowls CFB Odds
WEEK Bowls CFB ODDS COMPARISON
WANT MORE AI PICKS?
NET UNITS (INCL VIG & EXEC)
NET PROFIT (INCL VIG & EXEC) $100/UNIT
NET UNITS (INCL VIG)
NET PROFIT (INCL VIG) $100/UNIT
AI SPORTS PICK PRODUCTS
Create a Free Account
‘Create an Account’ to Get Remi’s Picks Today. Remi Finds New Picks
Remi calculates the probability a team will cover the line. Remi Works 24/7
Remi uses this probability to assign units to each pick.
Get Remi's AI Picks
Get Remi’s Top AI Sports Picks sent direct to your inbox.
Hedge Meaning in Betting | 4 Obvious Times to Hedge
Learn about hedge betting to manage risk and secure profits. Understand...
What is a Push in Betting? | 3 Ways To Use To Your Advantage
Understand what a push in betting means, how it happens in...
What Does the + and – Mean in Sports Betting? | 5 Easy Tips
Learn the basics of sports betting odds, what the plus (+)...
CFB Bowl Week of the 2025 season arrives as the sport’s most unpredictable and fascinating chapter, where motivation, preparation, and opportunity collide in ways that defy regular-season logic. This is the stretch where established powers share the stage with rising programs, where a bowl game can serve as a launching pad for the next season or a final statement for a senior-led roster. Teams like Oregon, LSU, and Penn State often treat bowl season as a proving ground, while Group of Five contenders embrace the spotlight as a chance to validate their entire year on a national stage. Quarterbacks preparing for the NFL use these games to cement draft stock, while younger players audition for expanded roles, making every matchup a blend of urgency and experimentation.
What makes Bowl Week especially volatile is how dramatically context shifts from game to game. Coaching changes, opt-outs, and transfer portal movement reshape rosters and force staffs to adapt quickly, turning preparation and adaptability into decisive edges. Some teams approach bowls with full competitive intent, while others focus on development, creating sharp contrasts that analytics can help identify beneath surface narratives. Neutral-site environments remove familiar edges, while travel, rest, and layoff length test focus and execution early. Bowl Week rewards teams that stay organized, motivated, and flexible, and punishes those relying on name recognition alone. For bettors and fans alike, this is where AI-driven insights shine brightest, cutting through noise to reveal which teams are fully invested, which matchups quietly favor depth and cohesion, and where opportunity outweighs reputation as the season reaches its final, most chaotic stage.
CFB Bowl Week opens in early December with a unique blend of urgency and uncertainty, as teams transition from the grind of the regular season into a postseason defined by preparation gaps, roster movement, and sharply different motivations. This is the window where programs like Utah, Oklahoma State, and Louisville often treat bowl games as tone-setters for the next cycle, while emerging teams seize the moment to validate their rise on a national stage. Quarterbacks stepping into expanded roles, coordinators testing schematic wrinkles, and veterans making final statements all converge to create games that feel less scripted and far more volatile than late-season conference matchups. Bowl Week rewards teams that stayed disciplined through the layoff and arrive with clarity of purpose rather than name recognition.
What separates this opening stretch of bowl season is how dramatically context shapes outcomes. Coaching transitions, opt-outs, and transfer portal decisions quietly redefine depth charts, forcing staffs to lean on cohesion and adaptability rather than raw talent. Neutral-site travel and extended rest periods challenge focus early, while teams with strong leadership often settle fastest and dictate terms. Some rosters play loose and aggressive with nothing to lose, while others struggle to recapture intensity after playoff dreams faded. For bettors and fans, this is where surface-level records matter far less than intent, continuity, and situational readiness. AI-driven analysis thrives in this space, identifying which teams are fully invested, which matchups quietly favor stability over star power, and where opportunity outweighs expectation as bowl season begins its most unpredictable and revealing phase.
1-0 Mindset 😤 pic.twitter.com/9JHF86NROV
— Alabama Football (@AlabamaFTBL) December 13, 2025
Live AI CFB Picks — Week Bowls
These picks update as information changes—injury reports, weather, and market movement. Each line shows our model’s fair price, the edge versus the market, and a unit confidence rating (1–10). Odds and availability vary by sportsbook and time. Edges are computed against the listed price; value may change after line moves. Always shop for the best number. See the full NCAAF Schedule.
Below is our current AI CFB picks Week Bowls, CFB computer picks Week Bowls, best bets, model edges, confidence ratings.
|
DATE | GAME | LEAN | %WIN | UNITS | LEVEL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ACTIVE PICKS LOCKED - SEE NOW | ||||||
Week Bowls Storylines & Angles
Offense vs. Defense Mismatches
Bowl Week forces offenses and defenses into unfamiliar analytical territory, where EPA per play and success rate often reveal more than raw point totals because preparation gaps and motivation differences magnify inefficiency. Teams that remain efficient snap to snap, such as programs built around veteran quarterbacks and stable offensive lines, tend to separate in bowl settings by avoiding negative plays even after long layoffs. High success-rate offenses that stay ahead of the chains stress defenses still adjusting to new rotations or schematic tweaks, especially in early bowls where cohesion often outweighs talent. Red-zone touchdown rate becomes a decisive separator during Bowl Week, as teams that finish drives consistently can exploit opponents still sorting out personnel or communication after opt-outs and transfers.
The clearest mismatches often emerge in pass-rush versus protection and the ability to create explosive plays without sacrificing structure. Defensive fronts that generate pressure with four can overwhelm bowl opponents lacking continuity up front, collapsing opponent EPA and forcing hurried throws. On the other side, offenses with reliable protection and quick-game answers maintain pace and prevent defensive momentum from building, especially against aggressive units. Pace itself becomes a strategic weapon in bowl games, with teams that can toggle tempo stressing substitution rules and exposing depth issues after extended rest. Explosive plays still matter, but Bowl Week often rewards teams that manufacture them through misdirection and play-action rather than raw speed alone. In this environment, AI-driven matchup analysis prioritizes how efficiency, protection, and explosiveness interact, identifying where structure survives chaos and where one trench mismatch can swing an otherwise unpredictable postseason contest.
Quarterback & Scheme Trends
Bowl Week places quarterbacks in uniquely revealing situations, where recent form and adaptability often matter more than season-long production after weeks away from live competition. Quarterbacks who process quickly and stay efficient against pressure tend to thrive in bowl settings, especially when facing defenses reshaped by opt-outs or coaching changes. Pressure versus blitz splits become especially telling, as some quarterbacks remain comfortable when extra rushers come while others struggle when pressure arrives with four and coverage holds. Bowl games frequently expose which quarterbacks can reset their timing after layoffs and which need rhythm to function, making early possessions critical indicators of game flow.
Scheme trends play an outsized role in stabilizing quarterback performance during Bowl Week. Programs that rely heavily on pre-snap motion continue to gain advantages by forcing defenses to declare coverage and simplify reads, a crucial edge when communication may be shaky. Increased under-center usage often signals a focus on play-action, run balance, and clock control, all designed to ease quarterbacks back into game speed. Situational play-calling tightens in high-leverage moments, with coordinators favoring concepts that protect the quarterback on third down and inside the red zone rather than chasing low-percentage explosives. AI-driven analysis highlights which teams are adapting schematically to support quarterback comfort and which are exposing their signal-callers to unnecessary risk. In Bowl Week, the intersection of quarterback readiness and scheme discipline frequently determines whether offenses operate efficiently or stall under postseason pressure.
Travel, Rest & Situational Spots
Bowl Week strips teams of their normal rhythms and exposes how travel, rest, and situational context quietly shape postseason outcomes. Cross-country trips to unfamiliar neutral sites introduce body-clock challenges that often surface early, particularly for teams playing in time zones far removed from their regular routines. Extended layoffs can dull timing, while shorter turnaround bowls reward teams with veteran leadership and established preparation habits. Altitude and climate shifts also matter more than advertised, especially for defenses forced to defend extended drives after weeks without game-speed conditioning. These edges tend to show up late, when snap counts rise and fatigue compounds mistakes in tackling, protection, and communication.
Situational angles become even sharper during bowl season because motivation is anything but uniform. Look-ahead and let-down dynamics frequently define early bowls, with some teams viewing the game as a springboard for the next season while others struggle to recapture urgency after missing playoff goals. Conference dynamics add another layer, as familiar opponents or long-standing regional rivals often produce tighter, more physical games than power ratings suggest. Coaching changes, interim staffs, and player opt-outs further skew intent, rewarding teams with continuity and clear leadership. AI-driven situational modeling thrives in Bowl Week by identifying which teams are fully invested, which are managing circumstance rather than chasing outcomes, and where travel stress or emotional imbalance quietly undermines performance. In a postseason defined by uneven motivation and disrupted routine, understanding context often matters as much as talent when evaluating who is positioned to finish the year strong.
Weather & Late-Breaking Injuries
Bowl Week weather trends may not dominate headlines, but they quietly reshape offensive expectations and betting angles across the postseason slate. Wind remains the most influential variable for totals and deep passing, with sustained speeds around 15 mph already reducing vertical attempt rates and anything above 20 mph forcing offenses to compress the field into quick-game concepts, screens, and tight end usage. Rain further limits timing and yards after catch, increasing ball-security risk and often lowering red-zone touchdown efficiency as coordinators grow more conservative near the goal line. Snow, while less common in bowl settings, dramatically tilts games toward trench play when it appears, favoring teams built around physical run games and disciplined defenses while neutralizing speed-based perimeter attacks. In outdoor bowls, these conditions frequently turn what looks like a shootout on paper into a possession-by-possession grind that rewards efficiency over explosiveness.
Player availability adds another critical layer during Bowl Week, especially with the combined impact of opt-outs, injuries, and snap management after a long season. Questionable or limited starters, particularly at quarterback, along the offensive line, or along the defensive front, often play but see adjusted workloads, shifting snaps to rotational players in high-leverage roles. Skill-position starters dealing with soft-tissue issues may remain active but operate within reduced route trees or situational packages, increasing reliance on tight ends, backs, or secondary receivers. On defense, limited pass rushers can prompt heavier blitz usage or softer coverage shells, subtly increasing short-area efficiency even when weather suppresses deep passing. These usage changes matter most when paired with adverse conditions, as depth and adaptability often decide whether drives survive or stall. AI-driven weather and availability modeling during Bowl Week helps identify when totals are inflated by reputation rather than environment, when passing volume is likely to compress sharply, and which teams are structurally equipped to function when postseason football strips the game down to fundamentals rather than flair.
Check up to the minute weather forecasts here.
Credit: USA TODAY/IMAGN
CFB Week Bowls Best Bets & AI Prop Picks
Week Bowls CFB Best Bet – Pro Tips
Note Price sensitivity: We crunch numbers, not teams. If the market moves beyond our
buy-to number, expected value decays and the edge can disappear. Respect the price.
Unit sizing (1–10): Our unit scale reflects model signal strength, injury/variance risk,
and current line availability. Higher units = stronger conviction, not permission to over-expose.
Staking & correlation: Default stake scales with edge and volatility. Avoid stacking too many
correlated outcomes (same game, same player ladder) unless you deliberately size down.
Closing-Line Value (CLV): Beating the close consistently is a quality signal—even across small samples.
Track your entry vs. close; it’s the most reliable feedback loop for long-term profitability.
Week Bowls Line Movement
Every pick includes a playable to line or price (e.g., -2.5, Over 44.5, +115). If you can’t get that number or better, consider passing or reducing stake. Lines move—check back for live updates in our Live AI Picks stream and see quick notes in Odds & Line Movement.
Note – all of our data is for informational purposes only and not a recommendation as to whether or how to wager.
More honors for our guys 🧵⤵️#BoomerSooner pic.twitter.com/PPPhi1PfRt
— Oklahoma Football (@OU_Football) December 15, 2025
Line Movement Tracker — Week Bowls
| Games | PTS | ML | SPR | O/U | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Aug 29, 2026 12:00PM EDT
NC State Wolfpack
Virginia Cavaliers
8/29/26 12PM
NCST
UVA
|
–
–
|
+108
-130
|
+2.5 (-110)
-2.5 (-110)
|
O 54.5 (-105)
U 54.5 (-115)
|
|
|
Aug 29, 2026 12:00PM EDT
North Carolina Tar Heels
TCU Horned Frogs
8/29/26 12PM
UNC
TCU
|
–
–
|
+210
-260
|
+6.5 (-102)
-6.5 (-120)
|
O 50.5 (-105)
U 50.5 (-115)
|
|
|
Sep 5, 2026 12:00PM EDT
Clemson Tigers
LSU Tigers
9/5/26 12PM
CLEM
LSU
|
–
–
|
+365
-490
|
+11.5 (-110)
-11.5 (-110)
|
O 50.5 (-110)
U 50.5 (-110)
|
|
|
Sep 5, 2026 12:00PM EDT
UCLA Bruins
California Golden Bears
9/5/26 12PM
UCLA
CAL
|
–
–
|
+102
-122
|
+1.5 (-110)
-1.5 (-110)
|
O 53.5 (-110)
U 53.5 (-110)
|
|
|
Sep 5, 2026 12:00PM EDT
Baylor Bears
Auburn Tigers
9/5/26 12PM
BAYLOR
AUBURN
|
–
–
|
+250
-315
|
+7.5 (-110)
-7.5 (-110)
|
O 58.5 (-110)
U 58.5 (-110)
|
|
|
Sep 5, 2026 12:00PM EDT
Louisville Cardinals
Ole Miss Rebels
9/5/26 12PM
LVILLE
OLEMISS
|
–
–
|
+235
-295
|
+7.5 (-115)
-7.5 (-105)
|
O 52.5 (-115)
U 52.5 (-105)
|
|
|
Sep 6, 2026 12:00PM EDT
Wisconsin Badgers
Notre Dame Fighting Irish
9/6/26 12PM
WISC
ND
|
–
–
|
+920
-1800
|
+19.5 (-110)
-19.5 (-110)
|
O 46.5 (-115)
U 46.5 (-105)
|
|
|
Sep 6, 2026 7:30PM EDT
Louisville Cardinals
Ole Miss Rebels
9/6/26 7:30PM
LVILLE
OLEMISS
|
–
–
|
+235
-290
|
+7 (-108)
-7 (-112)
|
O 53.5 (-112)
U 53.5 (-108)
|
|
|
Sep 7, 2026 12:00PM EDT
SMU Mustangs
Florida State Seminoles
9/7/26 12PM
SMU
FSU
|
–
–
|
-142
+120
|
-2.5 (-110)
+2.5 (-110)
|
O 53.5 (-110)
U 53.5 (-110)
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2026 12:00PM EDT
Ohio State Buckeyes
Texas Longhorns
9/12/26 12PM
OHIOST
TEXAS
|
–
–
|
+104
-125
|
+1.5 (-108)
-1.5 (-112)
|
O 47.5 (-115)
U 47.5 (-105)
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2026 12:00PM EDT
Oklahoma Sooners
Michigan Wolverines
9/12/26 12PM
OKLA
MICH
|
–
–
|
+122
-146
|
+2.5 (-104)
-2.5 (-118)
|
O 45.5 (-110)
U 45.5 (-110)
|
How Our AI Picks Work
Our CFB model blends play-by-play efficiency, drive-level simulations, and market-aware priors. We incorporate injury reports, rest/travel effects, and weather to adjust team strength and total expectations. Each game is simulated thousands of times to produce fair prices; the displayed Model Edge % is the gap between our fair price and the current market.
Market-aware: incorporates liquidity windows and closing-line efficiency.
Context-adjusted: rest days, travel, altitude, tempo, and scheme tendencies.
Transparency: we show confidence, edges, and track CLV and ROI.
Remi, our AI sports wizard, has been pouring over tons of data from every past game across CFB week Bowls using recursive machine learning to kick-ass AI to crunch the data to a single cover probability.
Interestingly enough, the data has been most watching on the trending factor human bettors tend to put on week Bowls’s strengths factors between a visitors team going up against a possibly deflated home teams. In reality, the true game analytics appear to reflect a strong lean against one Vegas line specifically.
Unlock this in-depth AI prediction and all of our CFB AI picks for FREE now.
FAQ — Week Bowls CFB AI Picks
Where can I see Week Bowls CFB AI picks by bet type?
Right on this page. We publish Week Bowls CFB computer picks organized by Against the Spread (ATS), Moneyline, Totals (Over/Under), and Player Props so you can jump straight to the markets you bet most.
What are the “best bets” for Week Bowls according to the model?
“Best bets” are our highest-confidence Week Bowls CFB AI picks based on fair price vs. current odds. Look for larger Model Edge % and higher confidence stars; those signal stronger value at widely available prices.
How are your Week Bowls CFB computer picks generated?
We combine play-by-play data, drive-level simulations, and market-aware priors. The model produces a fair price for each side/total/prop, then compares it to live odds to surface Week Bowls edges worth betting.
How often do you update Week Bowls CFB AI picks?
Throughout the week and up to kickoff. As injuries, weather, and prices move, our projections refresh—so check back closer to game time for the most accurate read on Week Bowls value.
Do your Week Bowls picks include player props like anytime TD or yardage?
Yes. Our Week Bowls CFB AI picks include props such as anytime touchdown, rushing/receiving yards, passing yards, attempts, and more when markets are liquid and pricing shows an edge.
Do you post same-game parlay (SGP) ideas for Week Bowls?
When correlations and prices justify it, we highlight SGP concepts tied to our Week Bowls AI edges—think side/total anchored to complementary player props. We only list combos when expected value remains positive.
What do Model Edge % and units mean?
Model Edge % is the gap between our fair price and the current line/price. Units (1–10) summarize signal quality, volatility, and line availability for Week Bowls CFB AI picks.
What are “buy-to” numbers, and what if the line moves?
“Buy-to” is the furthest playable number before expected value disappears. If the market pushes past that level, the Week Bowls pick may no longer qualify—wait for a better price or skip the bet.
Do you track closing-line value (CLV) and ROI for Week Bowls?
Yes. We grade results against widely available prices at publish time and monitor CLV to gauge process quality. You’ll also find recent record and ROI to keep Week Bowls performance transparent.
How should I size bets on Week Bowls CFB AI picks?
Scale stake size with edge and volatility. Larger Model Edge % and higher confidence typically merit slightly larger positions, but avoid over-exposure to correlated outcomes within the same game.
Are teasers viable for Week Bowls?
Sometimes. Teasers can make sense around key numbers when totals and pricing conditions are favorable. If our Week Bowls read flags teaser value, we’ll note the recommended legs and limits.
How do injuries, weather, and travel impact Week Bowls CFB picks?
Materially. The model adjusts team strength, pace, and totals for late scratches, snap-count news, wind/rain/cold thresholds, altitude, rest, and travel. Those inputs can change edges close to kickoff.
Where can I compare Week Bowls CFB odds to shop the best number?
Use your preferred odds screen or our odds links from this page. Shopping lines is essential—Model Edge % is calculated against available prices, and the best number often determines long-term ROI.
Can I get alerts when new Week Bowls CFB AI picks post or when lines move to buy-to?
Yes. Enable notifications or subscribe for alerts so you catch new Week Bowls AI picks, notable line moves, and updates to buy-to ranges before the market fully adjusts.
Past CFB AI Picks
|
CFB |
LEAN | %WIN | UNITS | RESULT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OLEMISS@GEORGIA | KEWAN LACY ANYTIME TD | 56.7% | 6 | WIN |
| BAMA@IND | FERNANDO MENDOZA UNDER 26.5 PASS ATT | 55.2% | 5 | WIN |
| OREG@TXTECH | OREG -126 | 58.9% | 6 | WIN |
| NEB@UTAH | DEVON DAMPIER UNDER 185.5 PASS YDS | 53.4% | 3 | LOSS |
| NOTEX@SDGST | NOTEX -7 | 54.2% | 4 | LOSS |
| BAMA@OKLA | ISAIAH SATEGNA III ANYTIME TD | 54.2% | 4 | WIN |
| BYU@TTU | PARKER KINGSTON OVER 20.5 LONGEST RECEPTION | 54.3% | 4 | WIN |
| UNLV@BOISE | BOISE -4.5 | 56.7% | 6 | WIN |
| ECU@FAU | FAU +7 | 57.8% | 7 | LOSS |
| OREG@WASH | WASH +7 | 54.9% | 4 | LOSS |
| WYO@HAWAII | WYO +7.5 | 55.1% | 5 | LOSS |
| COLO@KSTATE | COLO +17.5 | 54.0% | 4 | WIN |
| OHIOST@MICH | MICH +10.5 | 56.4% | 6 | LOSS |
| VATECH@UVA | VATECH +8 | 57.8% | 7 | LOSS |
| NWEST@ILL | LUKE ALTMYER UNDER 19.5 PASS COMP | 54.3% | 4 | WIN |
| ORE@WAS | DEMOND WILLIAMS JR UNDER 43.5 RUSH YDS | 55.2% | 5 | WIN |
| MIAMI@VATECH | VATECH +18.5 | 54.2% | 4 | WIN |
| GAST@TROY | TROY -9.5 | 55.7% | 5 | WIN |
| DEL@WAKE | DEL +18 | 56.7% | 6 | LOSS |
| NMEX@AF | NMEX -3.5 | 56.1% | 5 | WIN |
| WASHST@JMAD | WASHST +14.5 | 55.3% | 5 | WIN |
| ILL@WISC | WISC +9 | 55.1% | 5 | WIN |
| WKY@LSU | WKY +23.5 | 56.3% | 6 | WIN |
| WASH@UCLA | DEMOND WILLIAMS UNDER 27.5 PASS ATT | 56.3% | 6 | WIN |
| TCU@HOU | AMARE THOMAS OVER 69.5 RECV YDS | 55.2% | 5 | WIN |
| TEX@UGA | NATE FRAZIER UNDER 65.5 RUSH + REC YDS | 55.5% | 5 | WIN |
| PUR@WASH | ANTONIO HARRIS UNDER 73.5 RUSH + REC YDS | 54.1% | 4 | WIN |
| UVA@DUKE | DUKE -3.5 | 54.7% | 3 | LOSS |
| OKLA@BAMA | BAMA -6 | 54.5% | 3 | LOSS |
| OREGST@TULSA | OREGST -120 | 55.6% | 5 | LOSS |
| UTEP@MIZZST | MIZZST -5 | 54.3% | 4 | WIN |
| COLOST@NMEX | NMEX -14 | 57.1% | 6 | LOSS |
| PSU@MICHST | MICHST +7.5 | 56.5% | 6 | LOSS |
| MISSST@MIZZOU | MISSST +7.5 | 57.2% | 7 | LOSS |
| FAU@TULANE | FAU +17.5 | 56.0% | 6 | WIN |
| NCST@MIAMI | NCST +15.5 | 57.1% | 7 | LOSS |
| KENTST@AKRON | AKRON -6.5 | 55.4% | 5 | LOSS |
| JAXST@UTEP | JAXST -105 | 57.0% | 7 | WIN |
| FSU@CLEM | CLEM -118 | 57.1% | 5 | WIN |
| UNLV@COLOST | UNLV -4 | 55.2% | 5 | WIN |
| OREG@IOWA | IOWA +6.5 | 53.3% | 2 | WIN |
| NEB@UCLA | NEB +1.5 | 55.8% | 5 | WIN |
| KENSAW@NMEXST | NMEXST +10 | 56.5% | 6 | WIN |
| STNFRD@UNC | STNFRD +7.5 | 53.8% | 3 | WIN |
| DUKE@UCONN | UCONN +8.5 | 57.9% | 7 | WIN |
| NEVADA@UTAHST | NEVADA +9.5 | 55.9% | 5 | LOSS |
| SAMST@OREGST | SAMST +21 | 57.7% | 7 | WIN |
| NEB@UCLA | NICO IAMALEAVA UNDER 180.5 PASS YDS | 56.6% | 6 | LOSS |
| HOU@UCF | HOU -112 | 58.0% | 6 | WIN |
| KENTST@BALLST | BALLST -2.5 | 54.5% | 4 | WIN |
| WAKE@FSU | WAKE +10.5 | 56.4% | 6 | LOSS |
