Georgia Tech vs Vanderbilt: Result, Lines & ATS Trends (Birmingham Bowl, 2024)

Fri, Dec 27, 2024, 3:30 PM ESTBirmingham Bowl · Neutral site

Weather at kickoff62°F14 mphgusts 37DryWindy Over 48% of 274 games since 2023Weather watch ›

Georgia Tech

7-5 · Power #36

final

Final

Vanderbilt

6-6 · Power #53

▲ winner

Closing spread

GT -2.5

✓ VAN W

Total

48.5

▲ Over · 62 pts

Model before kickoff

GT 27–23 VAN

✗ GT (59%) lost

Closing line · ESPN BET

SourceESPN BET closing line

OpenGT -2.5

CloseGT -2.5

Total54.5 → 48.5

Books differ and lines move; check your sportsbook before betting.

Loading the recap…

Market

Open → close

Spread

OpenGT -2.5

no move

CloseGT -2.5

No change since the open

Total

Open54.5

▼ 6

Close48.5

Down 6 since the open

Line movement

Opening and closing line · tap a dot

Opened GT -2.5 · unchangedmodel GT -5.5

model GT -5.5

Openline modelKickoff

Closing line · ESPN BET

SourceESPN BET closing line

OpenGT -2.5

CloseGT -2.5

Total54.5 → 48.5

Books differ and lines move; check your sportsbook before betting.

Similar games

The recent games that looked most like this one before kickoff, and how they turned out

In the 10 games most like GT as a 2.5-point neutral-site favorite against VAN, the favorite won 8, covered 7, and 3 went over the total.

Compare by

Customize filters

Only include

Show up to

games

This game: VAN won 35–27 outright; the favorite didn’t cover, as in 3 of the 10 similar games. 62 points went over 48.5, as in 3 of 10.

Favorite won

8 of 1080%

Normal range · usually 56%

Favorite covered

7 of 1070%

Normal range · usually 47%

Went over

3 of 1030%

Normal range · usually 49%

All three sit in the normal range for favorites of this size, so history shows no clear lean. Average result: favorite by 6.9 against an average line of 4.8; 43.5 points a game (usually 53.3). Of the 2 overs, 0 had cashed by the end of Q3. When games like this go over ›

All 10 games

Match	Game	Line	Final	Covered	O/U
Close	TTU vs CAL 2023 · Postseason · close · similar rest & spread	-3.5	34–14	W	U55.5
Close	SJSU vs CCU 2023 · Postseason · close · similar total & rest	-7.5	14–24	L	U48.5
Close	HOU vs UL 2022 · Postseason · close · similar situation & rest	-5.25	23–16	W	U56.5
Close	LOU vs CIN 2022 · Postseason · close · similar rest & situation	-2.5	24–7	W	U38.5
Close	TOL vs LIB 2022 · Postseason · close · similar rest & situation	-3.5	21–19	L	U51
Close	WAKE vs MIZ 2022 · Postseason · close · similar rest & situation	-2.75	27–17	W	U58.75
Close	UTSA vs MRSH 2023 · Postseason · close · similar situation & rest	-7.5	35–17	W	O46.75
Close	BAY vs AFA 2022 · Postseason · close · similar rest & situation	-3.5	15–30	L	O42.25
Close	WISC vs OKST 2022 · Postseason · close · similar team ratings	-5	24–17	W	U45
Close	UCLA vs BOIS 2023 · Postseason · close · similar rest & situation	-6.5	35–22	W	O45.25

History, not a prediction. Every FBS game from 2021 on is compared with this one as it looked before kickoff (team strength, the betting line, season form, situation, venue and rest), and only close matches are kept. How matches are found

ATS

Records before kickoff

	Season	Cover	Neutral	Role
GT LLWLW	5-5	50%	1-1	2-2
VAN WWLWL	8-4	67%	—	7-2

Venue/role: GT neutral, as favorite; VAN neutral, as underdog. Squares: last 5 games ATS (W covered, L didn’t), oldest first.

Totals

Over/under before kickoff

	O-U	Over %	SU
GT UUUOO	4-7	36%	7-5
VAN UUUUO	6-6	50%	6-6

Went over in Q4. Of 363 earlier overs in games with totals 44.5–52.5, 34% had cashed by the end of Q3.

When games like this go over ›

Squares: last 5 games (O over, U under), oldest first. Hover for the score and line.

Last 10 games

Before kickoff, this and last season

	Straight up	Spread	Over / under
GT	5-5 50%	4-5 44%	4-6 40%
VAN	4-6 40%	6-4 60%	4-6 40%

Wins-losses (pushes and ties last). Spread and over / under skip games without a line.

Matchup stats

Season to date before kickoff · ranks among 137 FBS teams

Power rating this season

pts vs an average team · #rank · tap a dot

GT+2.9 →+8.6▲ 5.7#32

VAN−6.1 →+3.4▲ 9.5#54

Predashed line = average team · hover or tap a dotW16

Longer bar = better

VAN

#41

Offense

◀ GT better

#78

#75

Defense

◀ GT better

#94

+0.3 #49

Turnovers

VAN better ▶

+0.6 #28

70 plays #38

Pace

◀ GT faster

60 plays #129

Unit by unitEach offense against the other's defense

When GT has the ball

Advantage: GT offense

	GT off	VAN def	Edge
Points / game	29.1 #61	23.1 #47	Even
Yards / play	6.15 #41	6.02 #99	GT
PPA / play	+0.20 #28	+0.18 #106	GT
Success rate	46% #32	47% #122	GT

When VAN has the ball

Even matchup

	VAN off	GT def	Edge
Points / game	26.7 #78	24.8 #66	Even
Yards / play	5.32 #104	5.67 #76	GT
PPA / play	+0.15 #57	+0.11 #75	Even
Success rate	42% #72	43% #81	Even

Bars show league standing (dashed mark = league middle); Offense and Defense use the average rank across the four stats below. In the tables, a highlighted value and the Edge column mark the side ranked better by at least 15% of the league; defense values are what that team allows. Yards and turnovers from ESPN box scores; PPA from CollegeFootballData (garbage time excluded). Descriptive only: the model already uses these.

Points by quarter and half

Per game this season before kickoff · ranks among 134 FBS teams

GT scoring against the VAN defense

	Q1	Q2	1H	Q3	Q4	2H
GT scored	7.2 #33	7.9 #75	15.1 #49	4.0 #115	8.8 #29	12.8 #77
VAN allowed	4.3 #43	6.2 #32	10.5 #36	7.0 #102	4.8 #22	11.8 #57

VAN scoring against the GT defense

	Q1	Q2	1H	Q3	Q4	2H
VAN scored	6.8 #48	6.5 #102	13.3 #81	3.9 #117	8.3 #38	12.3 #84
GT allowed	3.8 #30	6.3 #34	10.1 #27	5.2 #61	8.2 #102	13.3 #81

Regulation only (overtime is left out). 1H = Q1 + Q2, 2H = Q3 + Q4. #1 scores the most, or allows the fewest. Season to date, not adjusted for opponents.