{"id":119862,"date":"2025-12-31T09:00:10","date_gmt":"2025-12-31T14:00:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/?p=119862"},"modified":"2025-12-31T11:42:21","modified_gmt":"2025-12-31T16:42:21","slug":"best-bet-ole-miss-georgia-betting-picks-college-football-playoff-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/betting\/best-bet-ole-miss-georgia-betting-picks-college-football-playoff-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Ole Miss vs. Georgia: College Football Playoff Betting Pick &#038; Prediction"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This season, I\u2019m breaking down a few of college football's biggest games each week and giving out at least one bet I like from each matchup.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Let\u2019s check out the Sugar Bowl matchup between Georgia and Ole Miss.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><b>Ole Miss vs. Georgia, current line:<\/b><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><a href=\"https:\/\/novig.onelink.me\/JHQQ\/m02yw1et\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Georgia -6.5 at Novig<\/span><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2>Ole Miss at Georgia Best Bet Prediction:<\/h2>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Georgia\u2019s defense had too many issues in the first meeting to trust it to cover this large number, so take Ole Miss against the spread.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Ole Miss vs. Georgia, best line: Ole Miss +6.5<\/b><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><b>\u00bb<\/b><a href=\"https:\/\/novig.onelink.me\/JHQQ\/m02yw1et\"> <b>Bet it now at Novig: Ole Miss +6.5 points<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n\t<div class='sfa-image-adds' style=\"margin-bottom: 20px;\">\n\t\t<a href='https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/newsletter\/'>\n\t\t<img decoding=\"async\" width=\"1024\" height=\"683\" src=\"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Sharp-Football-Analysis-Newsletter-Ad.jpg\" class=\"attachment-size-full size-size-full\" alt=\"Sharp Football Analysis Newsletter\" \/>\t\t<\/a>\n\t<\/div>\n\n\t\n<h3><b>When Ole Miss is on Offense<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Ole Miss runs the typical <\/span><b>Lane Kiffin<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> offense \u4e00 even though it's fully <\/span><b>Charlie Weis Jr<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2019s show now \u4e00 which means leaning on a passing attack that gets the ball out quickly to its playmakers in space.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">When these teams met in October, I recommended taking Ole Miss due to flaws in an inexperienced Georgia defense.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Although Georgia ended up covering after a fourth-quarter comeback, the concerns about Georgia proved fair as Ole Miss reached the end zone on each of its five drives through the first three quarters.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This might not be the same Georgia defense that took the field that day in mid-October.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Bulldogs' inexperienced defense has settled in and looked more like a typical <\/span><b>Kirby Smart <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">unit over the back half of the season.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">However, the strength of schedule got easier once Alabama, Ole Miss, and Tennessee were out of the way, though a rematch with Alabama added a key data point.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The most notable change has been a revival of Georgia\u2019s pass rush, as evidenced by these opponent-adjusted numbers from Sports Info Solutions:<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Through the Ole Miss game: ranked 84th in pressure rate generated<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Since the Ole Miss game: ranked 36th in pressure rate generated<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">There\u2019s no denying the pass-rush unit has improved, but that probably doesn\u2019t matter against an Ole Miss offense that gets the ball out quickly.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Ole Miss ranks 10th in opponent-adjusted pressure rate allowed in large part due to its reliance on quick dropbacks (zero\/one-step dropbacks and RPOs).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Quick dropbacks account for 56% of Ole Miss\u2019 pass plays, the nation\u2019s sixth-highest rate.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Ole Miss is going to run this offense no matter the opponent, but it\u2019s also the perfect strategy to lean into against Georgia, which has struggled to prevent yards after catch on those short, quick throws.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Against quick dropbacks, Georgia is averaging 7.3 yards per attempt allowed, ranked 103rd.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">And since Georgia lacks a true game-wrecker on its pass-rush unit, quick dropbacks are also the best way to neutralize its improved pass rush \u4e00 the Bulldogs rank 98th in pressure rate generated against quick dropbacks (19%).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">It\u2019s also worth noting that Georgia\u2019s defense improvement was most notable in the SEC championship game against Alabama, a team that relies heavily on traditional dropbacks.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In that matchup, Alabama only used 6 quick dropbacks, but they had success on those plays, averaging 7.5 yards per attempt.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Relying on the quick passing attack also eliminates concerns about Georgia\u2019s greatest strength on defense: its ability to defend the downfield pass.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In fact, in the last meeting between these teams, <\/span><b>Trinidad Chambliss<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> was only 2 for 12 on throws of 10 or more yards, yet it had almost no impact on Ole Miss\u2019 ability to march up and down the field.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Despite his performance in that game, we also can\u2019t rule out an improved downfield passing performance in this game from Chambliss.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Outside the red zone, Chambliss is completing 50% of his throws, ranked 23rd.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Georgia ranks 12th in completion rate allowed at that depth.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">One of the reasons Georgia struggles with the quick passing attack is a tackling issue.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Bulldogs are allowing a broken tackle once every 5.8 receptions, ranked 89th.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This is not an area where Georgia has improved, as it missed a season-high 8 tackles in the passing game in its last contest against Alabama, surpassing its previous season high of 6. That was set the week before against Georgia Tech.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In the run game, Georgia\u2019s defense holds a more clear-cut advantage based on these opponent-adjusted numbers from <a href=\"https:\/\/pro.sisdatahub.com\/cfb\/Leaders\/Players#\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Sports Info Solutions<\/a>:<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Ole Miss: ranked 43rd in yards before contact<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Georgia: ranked 10th in yards before contact allowed<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Ole Miss: ranked 40th in yards after contact<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Georgia: ranked 6th in yards after contact allowed<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">When Ole Miss has success on the ground, it\u2019s typically because its spread offense creates open running lanes, but Georgia has the athletes to defend that style of play.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Even when lined up with a light box, Georgia is only allowing 3.8 yards per attempt, the nation\u2019s seventh-lowest rate.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">For this reason, concerns about<\/span><b> Kewan Lacy<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2019s health \u4e00 he injured his shoulder against Tulane \u4e00 don\u2019t mean much as he\u2019s not likely to have an impact.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Georgia held Lacy to 31 yards on 12 carries in the first meeting, and a repeat performance is likely.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>When Georgia is on Offense<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Georgia runs an almost perfectly balanced offense, running the ball at a rate just 0.5% above expected based on situational data from <a href=\"https:\/\/campus2canton.com\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Campus2Canton<\/a>.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The strategy is more out of necessity due to concerns about <strong>Gunner Stockton<\/strong>\u2019s passing ability rather than the presence of a strong rushing attack.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Fortunately for the Bulldogs, a run-heavy game plan is the right way to attack Ole Miss.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Check out the opponent-adjusted numbers on the ground game via Sports Info Solutions:<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Georgia: ranked 80th in yards before contact<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Ole Miss: ranked 118th in yards before contact allowed<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Georgia: ranked 51st in yards after contact<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Ole Miss: ranked 59th in yards after contact allowed<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Georgia running backs were relatively successful in the first meeting, picking up 146 yards on 34 carries, though that only averages out to a modest 4.6 yards per attempt.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The reason Ole Miss had some moderate success slowing down the Bulldog rushing attack is that the scheme plays into Ole Miss\u2019 hands.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Take a look at Ole Miss\u2019 run defense by box type, via Sports Info Solutions:<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Light box: 5.6 yards per attempt allowed, ranked 86th<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Stacked box: 4.1 yards per attempt allowed, ranked 48th<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Georgia\u2019s preference for heavier formations, as well as a lack of respect for Stockton\u2019s arm, has allowed defenses to stack the box 64% of the time, the 20th-highest rate.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">So Ole Miss can frequently line up in the best version of its run defense against the Bulldogs.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Stockton is a factor in the rushing game as well, though, and that\u2019s part of why the Bulldogs moved the ball relatively easily in the first matchup.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Although he\u2019s not a dynamic runner, Stockton is averaging 40.5 yards per game on the ground, excluding sacks, and picked up 59 yards on 10 carries against Ole Miss in October.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Despite its athletic defense, Ole Miss has not fared well against mobile quarterbacks.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Based on opponent-adjusted numbers, Ole Miss is allowing 4.1% more yards on the ground to quarterbacks than expected, ranked 77th.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In the passing game, Georgia doesn\u2019t scare anyone but has survived thanks to its offensive line.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Georgia ranks sixth in the country in opponent-adjusted pressure rate allowed.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Ole Miss\u2019 defense ranks 19th by the same metric, but was helpless in the first meeting, generating a pitiful 11.4% pressure rate on Stockton.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Since Georgia doesn\u2019t fully trust Stockton as a downfield passer, it has built its passing attack around underneath routes, primarily trying to get<\/span><b> Zachariah Branch<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> into the open field.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Bulldogs throw the ball five yards downfield or fewer 53% of the time, the 23rd-highest rate, with Branch commanding a 29% target share on those plays per Sports Info Solutions.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Branch has been a dynamic weapon on those plays, averaging 8.0 yards per attempt, the 11th-best mark in the FBS.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">However, Ole Miss did have some success containing Branch, as he gained just 31 yards on 5 of those short targets.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">One of the most surprising developments of that first matchup was Stockton hitting on a few big plays down the field.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">On throws of at least 15 yards, Stockton completed 4 of 6 passes for 119 yards.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">However, this area has been Stockton\u2019s greatest weakness and one of the strengths of the Ole Miss defense.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Outside the red one, Stockton is completing just 38% of his throws at that depth, ranked 118th, while Ole Miss allows a 30% completion rate, the nation\u2019s sixth-lowest mark.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">If Stockton doesn\u2019t uncharacteristically hit on those big plays, perhaps there\u2019s a different outcome in the first matchup, and this rematch would be viewed differently.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<h3><b>Final Thoughts on Georgia vs. Ole Miss Best Bets<\/b><\/h3>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Although Georgia\u2019s defense has certainly improved, Ole Miss\u2019 scheme is built to exploit the Bulldogs\u2019 weaknesses, so let\u2019s take the points and <\/span><b>bet Ole Miss against the spread<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Based on how these teams performed against others, Ole Miss\u2019 strong offense performance against the Bulldogs in the first meeting looks repeatable.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">And while Georgia will likely have success and might still win a close game, it probably can\u2019t match Ole Miss\u2019 firepower as easily as it did in October.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n\t\t\t<div class=\"sf_image_divider\">\n\t\t\t\t<img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/themes\/Avada-child\/img\/red_lines-separate.png\" \/>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\n\t<div class='sfa-image-adds' style=\"margin-bottom: 20px;\">\n\t\t<a href='https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/newsletter\/'>\n\t\t<img decoding=\"async\" width=\"1024\" height=\"683\" src=\"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Sharp-Football-Analysis-Newsletter-Ad.jpg\" class=\"attachment-size-full size-size-full\" alt=\"Sharp Football Analysis Newsletter\" \/>\t\t<\/a>\n\t<\/div>\n\n\t\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This season, I\u2019m breaking down a few of college football&#8217;s  [&#8230;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":20699,"featured_media":114198,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"none","_seopress_titles_title":"Ole Miss vs. Georgia: College Football Playoff Betting Pick & Prediction","_seopress_titles_desc":"We give you our college football prediction for Georgia vs. Ole Miss when betting against the spread, breaking down the College Football Playoff matchup.","_seopress_robots_index":"","mc4wp_mailchimp_campaign":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[14],"class_list":["post-119862","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-betting","tag-articles"],"acf":[],"featured_image_urls":{"medium":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Trinidad-Chambliss-Week-8-2025-300x200.jpg","thumbnail":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Trinidad-Chambliss-Week-8-2025-150x150.jpg","medium_large":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Trinidad-Chambliss-Week-8-2025-768x512.jpg","custom-size":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Trinidad-Chambliss-Week-8-2025-694x683.jpg","custom-size-content":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Trinidad-Chambliss-Week-8-2025-300x300.jpg","podcast-custom-size":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Trinidad-Chambliss-Week-8-2025-350x350.jpg","homecustom-size-content":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Trinidad-Chambliss-Week-8-2025-500x500.jpg","viz-thumb":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Trinidad-Chambliss-Week-8-2025-255x140.jpg","amp-wp-small":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Trinidad-Chambliss-Week-8-2025-100x100.jpg","amp-wp-large":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Trinidad-Chambliss-Week-8-2025-738x430.jpg","amp-wp-normal":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Trinidad-Chambliss-Week-8-2025-230x160.jpg","blog-large":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Trinidad-Chambliss-Week-8-2025-669x272.jpg","blog-medium":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Trinidad-Chambliss-Week-8-2025-320x202.jpg","recent-posts":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Trinidad-Chambliss-Week-8-2025-700x441.jpg"},"appp_media":null,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/119862","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/20699"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=119862"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/119862\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":119871,"href":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/119862\/revisions\/119871"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/114198"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=119862"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=119862"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sharpfootballanalysis.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=119862"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}