← College Football slate
Ole Miss Rebels
13-2 last yr · #7 Elo
at
Sat, Oct 10, 12:00 AM ET
FirstBank Stadium
Vanderbilt Commodores
1-0 · #11 Elo
Spread —Total —Moneyline —
The read
On rating alone Ole Miss Rebels are 3.4 points better (#7 vs #11 of 240), and VAN add 0.0 for home field. The clearest mismatch is the rushing game: VAN rushing ranks #1, MISS defends it at #115; the other way MISS #49 into VAN's #32.
Who has the edge
Rating
Clear edge
MISS
MISS rated 3.4 points better on Elo (#11 vs #7).
Home & rest
Even
—
VAN gets 0.0 points for home field.
Passing game
Clear edge
MISS
MISS passing ranks #8, VAN defends it at #114; the other way VAN #1 into MISS's #20.
context · not in the margin
Rushing game
Clear edge
VAN
VAN rushing ranks #1, MISS defends it at #115; the other way MISS #49 into VAN's #32.
context · not in the margin
Third down & red zone
Slight edge
MISS
MISS third-down conversion ranks #36, VAN defends it at #111; the other way VAN #6 into MISS's #49.
context · not in the margin
Form (last 5)
Clear edge
VAN
VAN +19.0 per game over the last five, MISS +12.2.
context · not in the margin
Market
not priced
—
No line yet.
context · not in the margin
The margin, factor by factor
Ole Miss RebelsVanderbilt Commodores
1868 Elo · #7
RatingThe Elo gap in points — the model's core read on who is better, before the situational pieces below.
MISS +3.4 pts
1807 Elo · #11
road
Home field
not priced
home
—
Rest
even
—
+5.2 pts vs VAN D
Offense vs defenseEach offense's scoring rating against the other defense's — what drives the model total. Shown as an edge, though the winner call runs on Elo.
MISS +2.9 pts
+2.4 pts vs MISS D
L W W W W · +12.2
Form (last 5)Average margin over the last five games. Already inside the ratings — listed so you can see when recent form and the rating disagree.
VAN +3.4 pts
W · +19.0
+24.0
SP+ (last season)Bill Connelly's SP+ from last season, the prior the college model starts each season from.
MISS +3.7 pts
+20.3
—
MarketThe consensus spread, read as points. Compare with the model margin above it.
not priced
—
Bars are in points toward the favored side. Blue factors are inside the model's margin; grey ones are context it does not add on top (form and offense/defense are already in the ratings; injuries beyond the quarterback are not priced).
Dissect the matchup
CollegeFootballData, garbage time excluded · 2025 season (last season until three games are in)Biggest mismatches
- ▸VAN rush explosiveness (#2) against a MISS defense ranked #119 at stopping it
- ▸VAN rushing ppa / play (#1) against a MISS defense ranked #115 at stopping it
- ▸MISS passing ppa / play (#8) against a VAN defense ranked #114 at stopping it
- ▸MISS passing-down ppa (#7) against a VAN defense ranked #108 at stopping it
- ▸VAN line yards / rush (#9) against a MISS defense ranked #104 at stopping it
A mismatch is a rank gap of at least a fifth of the league between an offense and the defense it faces on the same measure. Descriptive rows (pass rate, pace, direction) are shown for reading the game, not ranked. ▲▼ mark where the last three games sit clearly above or below the season number, in the direction that helps that side.
Ole Miss Rebels offense vs Vanderbilt Commodores defense
ranks of 135| MISS off | VAN def | Edge | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identity | |||
| Pass rate / Pass rate faced | 49% | 54% | · |
| Standard-down shareShare of plays on standard downs (staying ahead of the chains). | 72% | 66% | · |
| Plays / game | 67 | 56 | · |
| Possession / game | 28:46 | 28:42 | · |
| Passing | |||
| Passing PPA / playPredicted points added per pass play (CFBD). | +0.46#8 | +0.35#114 | MISS |
| Pass success rate | 51%#7 | 43%#91 | MISS |
| Pass explosivenessPPA on successful pass plays — how big the wins are. | 1.56#60 | 1.56#75 | · |
| Yards / pass attempt | 9.0#10 | 7.1#66 | MISS |
| Completion % | 65%#38 | 67%#123 | MISS |
| Interception rate / Interceptions forced | 1.7%#34 | 1.7%#105 | MISS |
| Rushing | |||
| Rushing PPA / play | +0.15#49 | +0.04#32 | · |
| Rush success rate | 45%#52 | 40%#47 | · |
| Rush explosiveness | 0.96#66 | 0.93#53 | · |
| Line yards / rushYards credited to the offensive line (first 4 yards weighted). Defense column: allowed. | 2.79#99 | 2.66#24 | VAN |
| Stuff rate / Stuff rate forcedRushes stopped at or behind the line. | 21%#105 | 22%#31 | VAN |
| Power successConversion rate on 3rd/4th and ≤2, or goal-to-go from the 2. | 78%#25 | 72%#74 | MISS |
| Yards / rush | 4.6#46 | 3.7#30 | · |
| Situational | |||
| Standard-down PPA | +0.22#22 | +0.11#78 | MISS |
| Passing-down PPAObvious passing situations (2nd & 8+, 3rd/4th & 5+). | +0.53#7 | +0.38#108 | MISS |
| Third-down conversion | 43%#36 | 43%#111 | MISS |
| Points / scoring opportunityPoints per drive that reaches the opponent's 40. | 4.44#19 | 3.90#90 | MISS |
| Havoc rate faced / Havoc rateTFLs, forced fumbles, interceptions and passes defensed per play. | 13.3%#35 | 17.1%#39 | · |
| Turnovers / game / Takeaways / game | 0.93#24 | 1.15#89 | MISS |
Vanderbilt Commodores offense vs Ole Miss Rebels defense
ranks of 135| VAN off | MISS def | Edge | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identity | |||
| Pass rate / Pass rate faced | 52% | 48% | · |
| Standard-down shareShare of plays on standard downs (staying ahead of the chains). | 74% | 67% | · |
| Plays / game | 57 | 61 | · |
| Possession / game | 31:18 | 31:14 | · |
| Passing | |||
| Passing PPA / playPredicted points added per pass play (CFBD). | +0.55#1 | +0.13#20 | · |
| Pass success rate | 54%#3 | 38%#29 | · |
| Pass explosivenessPPA on successful pass plays — how big the wins are. | 1.54#74 | 1.55#64 | · |
| Yards / pass attempt | 9.3#4 | 6.5#36 | VAN |
| Completion % | 70%#7 | 57%#20 | · |
| Interception rate / Interceptions forced | 2.0%#48 | 1.7%#106 | VAN |
| Rushing | |||
| Rushing PPA / play | +0.35#1 | +0.19#115 | VAN |
| Rush success rate | 50%#8 | 43%#77 | VAN |
| Rush explosiveness | 1.21#2 | 1.08#119 | VAN |
| Line yards / rushYards credited to the offensive line (first 4 yards weighted). Defense column: allowed. | 3.37#9 | 3.11#104 | VAN |
| Stuff rate / Stuff rate forcedRushes stopped at or behind the line. | 16%#25 | 18%#83 | VAN |
| Power successConversion rate on 3rd/4th and ≤2, or goal-to-go from the 2. | 76%#38 | 70%#59 | · |
| Yards / rush | 5.7#7 | 4.2#62 | VAN |
| Situational | |||
| Standard-down PPA | +0.32#2 | +0.05#45 | VAN |
| Passing-down PPAObvious passing situations (2nd & 8+, 3rd/4th & 5+). | +0.78#1 | +0.29#67 | VAN |
| Third-down conversion | 51%#6 | 37%#49 | VAN |
| Points / scoring opportunityPoints per drive that reaches the opponent's 40. | 5.00#3 | 3.10#24 | · |
| Havoc rate faced / Havoc rateTFLs, forced fumbles, interceptions and passes defensed per play. | 12.9%#28 | 16.7%#49 | · |
| Turnovers / game / Takeaways / game | 0.92#19 | 1.00#106 | VAN |
Season
| MISS | VAN | |
|---|---|---|
| 13-2 | Record | 1-0 |
| 36.9 | Points for / game | 28.0 |
| 21.1 | Points against / game | 9.0 |
| 9-1 / 4-1 | Home / road | 1-0 / 0-0 |
| 9-6 | Against the spread | 0-1 |
| 8-7 | Over / underOvers–unders in this team's games. A tendency, not a lean. | 0-1 |
| L W W W W | Last 5 | W |
Season numbers are from 2025 until this season has games.
Power ratings
| MISS | VAN | |
|---|---|---|
| 1868 | Elo | 1807 |
| #7 of 240 | Rank | #11 of 240 |
| +14.0 | Offense ratingPoints per game above league average scored, opponent-adjusted. | +11.3 |
| +9.0 | Defense ratingPoints per game below league average allowed, opponent-adjusted. Positive is good. | +8.8 |
| — | Strength of scheduleMean Elo of opponents faced this season. | 1477 |
Elo drives the winner call. Offense/defense ratings drive the total.
Advanced
| MISS | VAN | |
|---|---|---|
| +16.5 | SP+ (this season)Bill Connelly's SP+ rating, points above average. | +9.8 |
| 0.304 | Offense PPA / playPredicted points added per play, garbage time excluded (CFBD). | 0.440 |
| 0.132 | Defense PPA / playPPA allowed per play — lower is better. | 0.203 |
| 48% / 40% | Success rate (off / def) | 52% / 42% |
| 1.29 / 1.29 | Explosiveness (off / def) | 1.39 / 1.31 |
| 886 | Talent composite247Sports team talent composite for the current roster. | 727 |
| 50% | Returning production | 35% |
Advanced stats are from 2025 until this season has about three games. Source: CollegeFootballData.
Head to head
| 2023 | VAN 7 at MISS 33 | MISS · MISS covered |
How the margin was built
- Rating gap
- MISS +3.4 pts
- Home field
- VAN +— pts
- Rest
- Even
- Weather / roof
- — pts on the total
- Model margin
- —
- Model total
- —
Market
- Spread
- —
- Total
- —
- Moneyline
- —
Per-book prices appear once the multi-book feed has this game (about a week out).
Informational only. Winner probabilities are backtested and calibrated; spread and total calls are tracked leans. 21+, 1-800-GAMBLER.