College Player Props

Books post college props game by game in the days before kickoff, so this fills in as the week goes. Right now: 836 players across 35 games.

No hit rates here, on purpose

We hold no college player game logs, so any “hits 7 of his last 10” we put here would be invented. What we can show is real: what the ladder implies, the points the game line hands that offence, what the opposing defence did last season, and how much of that production actually returns.

These are milestone ladders, not over/unders.

Georgia Tech vs Virginia Tech

Sat 3:30 PM ETtotal 57.537 props

Ethan GrunkemeyerVTPassing yards
market midpoint ≈ 305 ydsVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct0% of passing production back price steady
180+-260096.3%190+-182094.8%200+-134093.1%210+-97090.7%220+-73088%230+-56585%240+-43881.4%250+-34077.3%260+-27273.1%270+-21868.6%280+-17163.1%290+-13757.8%297+-11854.1%298+-11854.1%300+-11152.6%310++11346.9%320++13941.8%330++17336.6%340++21431.8%350++26627.3%360++33223.1%370++41719.3%380++52116.1%390++66013.2%400++86010.4%410++10608.6%
Jeffrey OvertonVTRushing yards
market midpoint ≈ 79 ydsVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct31% of rushing production back price steady
25+-300096.8%30+-164094.3%40+-68087.2%50+-35578%60+-21568.3%70+-13958.2%74+-11854.1%75+-11753.9%80++10648.5%90++15040%100++20532.8%110++28026.3%120++38020.8%130++50616.5%140++66013.2%150++87010.3%160++11208.2%
Justice HaynesGTRushing yards
market midpoint ≈ 77 ydsGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct35% of rushing production back price steady
25+-290096.7%30+-150093.8%40+-62086.1%50+-33677.1%60+-20266.9%70+-13256.9%72+-11854.1%73+-11753.9%80++11147.4%90++15639.1%100++21531.7%110++29025.6%120++39320.3%130++52416%140++70012.5%150++90010%160++11807.8%
Luke ReynoldsVTReceiving yards
market midpoint ≈ 66 ydsVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct54% of receiving production back price steady
25+-142093.4%40+-39879.9%50+-21868.6%60+-13156.7%63+-11653.7%70++11746.1%80++17336.6%90++24728.8%100++35122.2%110++47717.3%120++64013.5%130++89010.1%140++12007.7%
Marcellous HawkinsVTRushing yards
market midpoint ≈ 57 ydsVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct31% of rushing production back price steady
20+-164094.3%25+-88089.8%30+-52283.9%40+-24370.8%50+-13757.8%54+-11353.1%60++11746.1%70++17836%80++26827.2%90++37820.9%100++54615.5%110++77011.5%120++10808.5%
Que'Sean BrownVTReceiving yards
market midpoint ≈ 66 ydsVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct54% of receiving production back price steady
25+-136093.2%40+-38079.2%50+-21568.3%60+-13156.7%63+-11553.5%70++11646.3%80++16937.2%90++23929.5%100++33223.1%110++46617.7%120++64013.5%130++89010.1%140++11807.8%
Ayden GreeneVTReceiving yards
market midpoint ≈ 49 ydsVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct54% of receiving production back price steady
15+-146093.6%25+-45481.9%40+-16261.8%46+-11653.7%47+-11753.9%50++10548.8%60++16737.5%70++25328.3%80++37621%90++54515.5%100++77011.5%110++10608.6%
Jordan AllenGTReceiving yards
market midpoint ≈ 58 ydsGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct11% of receiving production back price steady
25+-81089%40+-25471.8%50+-14559.2%54+-11954.3%55+-11653.7%60++11047.6%70++17037%80++25128.5%90++35621.9%100++50616.5%110++70012.5%120++9609.4%
Dalen PensonGTReceiving yards
market midpoint ≈ 42 ydsGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct11% of receiving production back price steady
15+-84089.4%25+-29974.9%40+-11252.8%50++14840.3%60++23529.9%70++36521.5%80++54815.4%90++77011.5%100++10808.5%
Davion BrownVTReceiving yards
market midpoint ≈ 23 ydsVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct54% of receiving production back price steady
15+-18665%21+-11353.1%25++12045.5%40++29625.3%50++49216.9%60++82010.9%
Aidan Birrfgm
price steady
1+-28574%
Alberto MendozaGTAnytime TD
14.3% to scoreGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct13% of overall production back price steady
Over+60014.3%
Ayden GreeneVTAnytime TD
25.3% to scoreVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct37% of overall production back price steady
Over+29525.3%
Benji GosnellVTAnytime TD
13.3% to scoreVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct37% of overall production back price steady
Over+65013.3%
Chad AlexanderGTAnytime TD
14.3% to scoreGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct13% of overall production back price steady
Over+60014.3%
Chris CorboGTAnytime TD
13.3% to scoreGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct13% of overall production back price steady
Over+65013.3%
Dalen PensonGTAnytime TD
22.7% to scoreGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct13% of overall production back price steady
Over+34022.7%
Davion BrownVTAnytime TD
20% to scoreVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct37% of overall production back price steady
Over+40020%
Ethan GrunkemeyerVTAnytime TD
33.3% to scoreVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct37% of overall production back price steady
Over+20033.3%
Gavin HarrisGTAnytime TD
11.8% to scoreGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct13% of overall production back price steady
Over+75011.8%
Georgia Tech D/STAnytime TD
15.4% to score price steady
Over+55015.4%
Isaiah FuhrmannGTAnytime TD
9.1% to scoreGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct13% of overall production back price steady
Over+10009.1%
Ja'Ricous HairstonVTAnytime TD
12.5% to scoreVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct37% of overall production back price steady
Over+70012.5%
Jaiven PlummerGTAnytime TD
8.3% to scoreGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct13% of overall production back price steady
Over+11008.3%
Jeffrey OvertonVTAnytime TD
81% to scoreVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct37% of overall production back price steady
Over-42581%
Jordan AllenGTAnytime TD
29.4% to scoreGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct13% of overall production back price steady
Over+24029.4%
Justice HaynesGTAnytime TD
76.2% to scoreGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct13% of overall production back price steady
Over-32076.2%
Kevin RocheGTAnytime TD
26.7% to scoreGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct13% of overall production back price steady
Over+27526.7%
Luke ReynoldsVTAnytime TD
46.5% to scoreVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct37% of overall production back price steady
Over+11546.5%
Malachi HosleyGTAnytime TD
16.7% to scoreGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct13% of overall production back price steady
Over+50016.7%
Marcellous HawkinsVTAnytime TD
72.6% to scoreVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct37% of overall production back price steady
Over-26572.6%
Marlion JacksonVTAnytime TD
16.7% to scoreVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct37% of overall production back price steady
Over+50016.7%
Que'Sean BrownVTAnytime TD
39.2% to scoreVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct37% of overall production back price steady
Over+15539.2%
Rahkeem SmithGTAnytime TD
8.3% to scoreGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct13% of overall production back price steady
Over+11008.3%
Trelain MaddoxGTAnytime TD
48.8% to scoreGT implied 23.8 pts · underdogVirginia Tech D was soft — 10th pct13% of overall production back price steady
Over+10548.8%
Tyseer DenmarkVTAnytime TD
10.5% to scoreVT implied 33.8 pts · favouredGeorgia Tech D was soft — 27th pct37% of overall production back price steady
Over+85010.5%
Virginia Tech D/STAnytime TD
17.4% to score price steady
Over+47517.4%

Prices are DraftKings, refreshed every 30 minutes; tap any rung to send it to your betslip. We publish no model or pick on college player props — our own measurement says this sport is efficiently priced, and every spread band we tested lands at a coin flip. This board is here so you can read the market, not so we can beat it.