The widest Heisman-adjacent edge belongs to Georgia: its best price of 20c on Polymarket sits 2.6 points above the model's 17.4% fair value. That is the largest gap between price and model across the field of title contenders, and since the Heisman reliably tracks quarterbacks on the leading programs, title equity is the cleanest read available on where the market and the model disagree.
The pattern underneath it is consistent. The favorites carry the richest premiums, the mid-board names tighten toward fair, and only one program trades under the model. The disagreement is not random noise; it is concentrated at the top.
Why title equity stands in for the Heisman market
There is no separate Heisman line in this data set. What there is: a de-vigged national-title market across Kalshi and Polymarket, with a model fair value for each contender. The link is the award's history. Heisman winners are overwhelmingly quarterbacks attached to teams in the title picture, so the title board doubles as a contender-strength ranking.
Read that way, every title price carries Heisman signal. A team the market lifts on title equity is usually lifting its quarterback's award case at the same time. The gap between the model's fair value and the cheapest contract is the measurable disagreement, and it is where the analysis lives.
Where does the market overpay the Heisman favorites?
At the top, price runs over model. Georgia (20c vs 17.4%), Ohio State (17c vs 15.1%) and Notre Dame (15c vs 13.3%) all trade above fair value, premiums of 2.6, 1.9 and 1.7 points. Miami adds another 1.7-point gap at 13c against 11.3%. These are the names the market is most confident in, and confidence shows up as a premium over the model.
The exception at the top is Alabama. Its 7c best price on Polymarket matches the model's 7% fair value exactly, the only favorite priced flat. For a reader scanning for contenders the market has not marked up, Alabama is the one top-tier name trading at model rather than over it.
Which contenders trade cheapest to fair?
The best price map splits by venue. Polymarket shows the cheapest contract on Georgia (20c), Miami (13c) and Texas (9c); Kalshi shows it on Ohio State (17c), Notre Dame (15c) and Oklahoma (1c). The split matters because the disagreement is only tradable at the lowest available price, and that venue changes name to name.
Texas sits a half-step down the board at 9c against 7.5% fair value, a 1.5-point premium that mirrors the favorites rather than the longshots. Below that, the premiums compress: Indiana's 7c runs just 0.5 points over its 6.5% fair value, among the tightest on the board.
Where does the model undercut the market?
One name reverses the pattern. Oklahoma's best price of 1c on Kalshi sits below the model's 1.3% fair value. It is the only contender where price trails the model rather than leading it, which makes it the sharpest point of disagreement in the other direction: the market is pricing Oklahoma's title equity, and by extension any Heisman case tied to it, lower than the model reads it.
The caveat is scale. At 1c the contract is deep in the tail, and a fraction of a point either way is within the noise of a thin market. The model's read is that Oklahoma is marginally live where the price says it is not; the honest framing is that both the price and the model can be wrong at that altitude.
How to read the edges
The disagreement is top-heavy. Georgia, Ohio State, Notre Dame and Miami carry the largest premiums over fair value, Alabama prices flat, and Oklahoma alone trades under the model. For a reader using title equity as a Heisman lens, that is the full shape: the market pays up for the clear favorites and marks down the tail.
Prices move, and the model can miss. These figures are a snapshot of the national-title board as of mid-October, not a standalone Heisman market or financial advice. Traders comparing venues can note the Kalshi code FADE (trade $25, get up to $500) and Polymarket code TGSWC (deposit $20, get a $50 trading bonus) when deciding where the cheapest contract lives.
