Georgia is the single biggest disagreement on the board. The market's best price of 17c on Polymarket sits 2.4 points above the model's 14.6% fair value, the widest absolute gap among title contenders and, by extension, the Heisman-relevant field. On a relative basis the disagreement is loudest further down the board, where Ole Miss trades at 3c against a 1.8% fair value, a premium of roughly two-thirds.
The pattern matters because the Heisman almost always follows a quarterback on a playoff-caliber team, so title equity is the cleanest public proxy for which programs the market and the model are arguing over.
Why title equity stands in for the Heisman market
There is no standalone Heisman line in this data set, and inventing one would defeat the purpose. What the data does offer is a de-vigged consensus fair value on each title contender across Polymarket and Kalshi, plus the cheapest venue to trade each team.
That title read is a defensible stand-in. The award has leaned heavily toward signal-callers on teams in the national-title conversation, so the programs the market rates highest for a championship are the same programs whose quarterbacks dominate Heisman pricing. When the model and the market disagree on a team's title equity, they are implicitly disagreeing on that team's Heisman narrative too.
Where the model and market disagree most
The disagreement here is one of level, not direction. Every contender trades above the model's fair value, which is the vig showing up in the price rather than the market betting against the model's ranking order.
In absolute terms, Georgia leads at plus-2.4 points (17c versus 14.6%), with Notre Dame next at plus-1.6 (12c versus 10.4%) and Texas at plus-1.4 (14c versus 12.6%). Alabama sits plus-1.3 (8c versus 6.7%). These are the programs where the price asks traders to pay the most over what the model considers fair.
The model's ordering is intact: Georgia on top, then the Ohio State and Texas tier, then Notre Dame. The market is not fading that order; it is charging a premium on top of it.
The longshot premium: Ole Miss and Florida
The relative gaps widen at the bottom of the board. Ole Miss at 3c against a 1.8% fair value and Florida at 2c against a 1.4% fair value both carry markups well north of the favorites in percentage terms, even though the raw cent spread is small.
This is standard behavior in prediction markets: cheap contracts round up, and the minimum tick dominates the price. A 1-cent premium on a 2c line is a far larger slice than a 2-cent premium on a 17c line. For Heisman purposes, these are the dart-throw quarterbacks whose stories would need a leap in team results to matter, and the price reflects that the model gives them little room.
Cheapest venue to trade each edge
Venue matters because the best price is not uniform. Polymarket holds the cheapest number on Georgia (17c), Ohio State (14c), Miami (10c), Alabama (8c), LSU (5c) and Oregon (5c). Kalshi holds Texas (14c), Notre Dame (12c), Indiana (8c) and Ole Miss (3c).
For a trader sizing a position on title-equity disagreement, the venue split is the difference between paying the model's premium and paying even more. Polymarket lists code TGSWC and Kalshi lists code FADE for traders new to those exchanges.
What the gaps do and don't tell you
The edges mapped here measure price over fair value, not a guarantee that the model is right. Prices and the model can both be wrong, and a consensus fair value is an estimate, not a settled outcome.
The honest read is that the market currently agrees with the model on who the contenders are and disagrees only on how much to charge. The largest absolute premium sits with Georgia, the richest relative premium sits with the longshots, and the cheapest route to each contract depends on whether the team lives on Polymarket or Kalshi. None of this is financial advice; it is a snapshot of where price and model diverge as of early October.
