Redshirt
Analysis

Win-Total Value: LSU, Indiana Screen Below Fair

Win-total value screens on the same divergence logic as the title board, and LSU and Indiana are the college football teams the model flags trading below fair value.

By The Model Desk · 2026-09-13
Analysis
vsvsvs
Key takeaways
  • LSU's national-title contract trades at 9c on Kalshi against a model fair value of 10.3%, the widest below-fair gap on the board.
  • Indiana prices at 5c on Polymarket versus a 6.8% fair value, the second-clearest mispricing the model flags.
  • Alabama (1c vs 1.5% fair) and Oregon (2c vs 2.3% fair) also sit fractionally below model fair value.
  • Texas leads the board at 14.4% fair value but trades rich at 15c on Kalshi, the opposite of a value signal.
  • The mispricing screen compares best cross-venue price to de-vigged consensus fair value; a lower price than fair value flags cheap.

LSU and Indiana are the teams the model flags as most clearly mispriced to the cheap side. LSU's national-title contract trades at 9c on Kalshi against a model fair value of 10.3%, and Indiana trades at 5c on Polymarket against a 6.8% fair value. Both sit below the de-vigged consensus, the signature of a contract the market is pricing under the model's read.

How the model flags a mispriced team

The screen is mechanical. The model builds a de-vigged consensus fair value from Kalshi and Polymarket prices, then compares it to the single best price available across venues. When the best price sits below fair value, the contract is cheap relative to the model. When it sits above, it is rich.

The national-title board is the reference point here because it is the most liquid and most continuously priced CFB futures market. Its divergences are the cleanest available signal of where the model and the market disagree, which makes it the natural starting point for any win-total value read as well.

The same divergence logic transfers to season win-total markets: a team the title board prices under fair value is a team the model rates higher than the market, and that gap tends to show up wherever the same roster is priced.

Where value sits: LSU and Indiana below fair

Four contracts currently trade at or below model fair value. LSU is the widest in raw terms, with a 10.3% fair value against a 9c best price on Kalshi. Indiana is the widest in proportional terms, a 6.8% fair value against a 5c best price on Polymarket.

Alabama and Oregon round out the cheap side by a hair. Alabama's 1c price on Polymarket sits just under its 1.5% fair value, and Oregon's 2c on Polymarket edges under a 2.3% fair value. These are thinner gaps and belong to the longshot tier, where a single cent is a large share of the price.

LSU trades on Kalshi under code FADE and Indiana on Polymarket under code TGSWC for new accounts.

Best title price, teams below model fair value
LSU9c
Indiana5c
Oregon2c
Alabama1c

The rich side: Texas and Notre Dame trade over fair

The opposite signal is just as clear. Texas leads the board at 14.4% fair value but trades at 15c on Kalshi, above the model. Notre Dame (11.9% fair, 13c), Ohio State (11.5% fair, 12c) and Miami (10.7% fair, 11c) all carry a best price above their fair value.

For a value screen, these are the contracts to pass on rather than back. A price above fair value means the market is charging a premium over the model's read, the reverse of the LSU and Indiana setups.

Fair value vs best price, top of board
Texas FV14.4%
Notre Dame FV11.9%
Ohio State FV11.5%
Miami FV10.7%
LSU FV10.3%

Reading this for win-total markets

Title equity is a proxy, not a settlement. Win-total contracts pay on regular-season game counts, so each line should be judged against its own number rather than a championship price. What the title board provides is direction: the teams the model rates above the market on the biggest, most liquid market.

On that read, LSU and Indiana are the names carrying a model edge, with Alabama and Oregon as marginal longshot cases. Texas and the rest of the top tier screen rich. Prices and the model can both be wrong, and none of this is financial advice; the value simply sits where the traded price falls below the model's fair value.

TeamsLSUIndianaAlabamaOregonTexas
Advertisement
ProphetX ad

Frequently asked questions

Which college football teams does the model think are mispriced?

LSU and Indiana screen cheapest relative to model fair value. LSU trades at 9c on Kalshi against a 10.3% fair value, and Indiana trades at 5c on Polymarket against a 6.8% fair value.

How does the model decide a team is mispriced?

It compares the best available cross-venue price to a de-vigged consensus fair value built from Kalshi and Polymarket. When the traded price sits below fair value, the contract screens cheap; when it sits above, it screens rich.

Is LSU a better value than Indiana?

LSU carries the larger raw fair-value cushion at 10.3% versus a 9c price, but Indiana's gap is proportionally wider at 6.8% fair value versus a 5c price. Both sit on the cheap side of the model.

Why use the title board to talk about win-total value?

The national-title market is the most liquid and continuously priced CFB futures market, so its divergences are the cleanest read on how the model and market disagree. Win-total contracts settle on regular-season outcomes and should be evaluated on their own lines.

Where can these contracts be traded?

LSU's best title price sits on Kalshi and Indiana's on Polymarket. New Kalshi accounts can use code FADE and Polymarket accounts code TGSWC.

About the author
The Model Desk

The Redshirt Analytics modeling team prices every college football futures contract and tracks the gaps between fair value and live market prices on Kalshi, Polymarket and ProphetX.