The Cheez-It Citrus Bowl between the No. 18 Michigan Wolverines and the No. 14 Texas Longhorns features a compelling quarterback matchup, a significant coaching change and multiple player opt-outs.
Lets dive into each school on both sides of the ball and prepare for this New Year’s Eve matchup.
Game Details and How to Watch: Michigan vs. Texas
- Date: Wednesday, December 31, 2025
- Time: 3:00PM Eastern
- Site: Camping World Stadium
- City: Orlando, FL
- TV/Streaming: ABC
Game Odds: Michigan vs. Texas
The latest odds as of Monday courtesy of DraftKings:
- Moneyline: Texas Longhorns (-290), Michigan Wolverines (+235)
- Spread: Texas -7 (-112)
- Total: 48.5 points
Be sure to check out DraftKings for all the latest game odds & player props for every matchup this week on the college football schedule!
Texas Longhorns
Head Coach: Steve Sarkisian
2025 Record: 9-3
Offense Ranking: 38
Defense Ranking: 20
Strength of Schedule: 6
Texas’ 2025 season settled into strong-but-unsatisfying territory, finishing 9–3 (6–2 Big 12) with an underlying profile that graded closer to a fringe contender than a true National Title threat. The Longhorns checked in 22nd nationally in SP+, with second-order wins (8.0) suggesting the record slightly overstated their week-to-week dominance against a Top 10 schedule. HC Steve Sarkisian’s team leaned on a sturdier 20th-ranked defense, which helped stabilize close games, while a 38th-ranked offense oscillated between explosive spurts and prolonged inefficiency. Texas’ best moments came in statement wins over Oklahoma and Texas A&M, while decisive losses to Ohio State, Florida, and Georgia underscored the remaining gap versus elite competition. In the end, this was a competitive Longhorns team—deep, battle-tested, and dangerous—but still a step short of the SEC’s highest caliber programs when margins tightened.
The Texas Longhorns Offense
Texas’ offense finished the season as a middle-of-the-pack SEC unit, ranking 38th in SP+ and reflecting an attack that generated explosive plays without consistent efficiency. The Longhorns posted a 40.5% offensive success rate (91st) and struggled on standard downs, frequently falling behind the chains and placing stress on third-down execution. While the run game flashed upside with occasional chunk gains, it was held back by a 91st-ranked rushing success rate and a high stuff rate (115th), limiting early down control. The passing game offered more volatility than reliability, pairing solid 17.4 yards per successful dropback (8th) with a low 40.6% overall passing success rate (82nd) and heavy dependence on intermediate and vertical shots. Ultimately, Texas’ offense was capable of scoring in bunches against weaker defenses, but inconsistency, penalties (126th), and stalled drives prevented it from becoming a dependable complement to the Longhorns’ stronger defensive profile.
The Texas Longhorns Defense
Texas’ defense was the backbone of the team, finishing 20th in Defensive SP+ and consistently keeping the Longhorns competitive against the nation’s 6th ranked schedule. The unit excelled against the run, ranking 18th in rushing success rate allowed and 7th in EPA per rush, showing a front that could win early downs and limit efficiency rather than just chase splash plays. Against the pass, Texas allowed production between the 20s but tightened in key moments, pairing a 29th-ranked ANY/A allowed with strong third-down defense that finished 25th overall. While the pass rush generated steady pressure (16th in sacks per dropback), the havoc profile leaned more toward discipline and leverage than disruption, reflected in middling overall havoc rates, especially from their defensive line (127th). In total, Texas fielded a reliable, physically sound defense that masked offensive inconsistency and drove the Longhorns to a nine-win season despite frequent situational stress.
Michigan Wolverines
Head Coach: Biff Poggi
2025 Record: 9-3
Offense Ranking: 53
Defense Ranking: 12
Strength of Schedule: 26
Michigan’s 2025 season settled into a 9–3 (7–2) campaign that was in line with the underlying profile, with 8.6 second-order wins suggesting a slightly fortunate but still sturdy year. The Wolverines finished 27th in SP+, driven by a defense that ranked 12th nationally, while an offense that checked in at 53rd remained functional but rarely dominant. They leaned heavily on that defensive backbone, which consistently limited efficiency and kept Michigan competitive even when the offense sputtered against elite opponents. Losses to 12-1 Ohio State and 9-3 USC underscored the ceiling issues, but Michigan reliably handled the middle tier of the Big Ten and avoided bad losses. In total, this was a solid, defense-led Michigan team that banked wins through control and discipline, even if it lacked the explosiveness to push into true conference-title contention.
The Michigan Wolverines Offense
Michigan’s offense finished the season ranked 53rd in SP+, reflecting a unit that was efficient enough to win games but rarely tilted the field against top competition. The Wolverines leaned on a strong run game foundation, posting a 14th-ranked rushing success rate and 14th in yards per rush, with consistent movement generated before contact (7th). In contrast, the passing attack was more uneven, ranking 37th in passing success rate and relying on explosives (21st in 20+ yard completion rate) rather than sustained efficiency. Michigan struggled in high-leverage moments, finishing 136th in fourth-down conversion rate (16.7%) and often stalling drives despite solid standard-down production. Overall, the offense was methodical and run-driven, capable of controlling games against lesser opponents but lacking the situational sharpness to consistently support the Wolverines’ superb defense.
The Michigan Wolverines Defense
Michigan’s defense was the clear identity of the team, finishing 12th nationally in Defensive SP+ and consistently giving the Wolverines a high weekly floor. The unit excelled at disrupting rhythm, ranking 5th in pressure rate and 17th in yards per play allowed, forcing opponents to work methodically down the field. Against the run, Michigan was sturdy and assignment-sound, checking in 34th in rushing success rate allowed while limiting yards before contact (11th nationally). The secondary held up well situationally, ranking 3rd in yards per successful dropback and pairing coverage discipline with timely pressure (41.2% pressure rate: 5th). Overall, this was a well-coached, aggression-balanced defense that consistently kept Michigan competitive, even when offensive limitations capped the team’s ceiling.
Texas and Michigan: Team Stats and Betting Trends
- These schools each played Ohio State and Oklahoma this season - Texas lost to Ohio State but beat Oklahoma while Michigan lost to both
- Michigan is 4-8 ATS this season
- Texas is 4-7-1 ATS this season
- The OVER has cashed in 6 of Michigan’s 12 games this season (6-6)
- The OVER has cashed in 5 of Texas’ 12 games this season (5-7)
Rotoworld Best Bets
Please bet responsibly. If you or someone you know has a gambling problem, call the National Gambling Helpline at 1-800-522-4700.
Eric Froton (@CFFroton): WR Andrew Marsh OVER 44.5 Receiving Yards
Despite the turmoil surrounding HC Sherrone Moore’s bizarre exit from the program, Michigan should have a pretty well-stocked roster while Texas is missing a slew of core contributors, including 7-of-11 defensive starters. True freshman Michigan WR Andrew Marsh was brought along slowly, running just 14 routes in the first four games of the year. However, once inserted into the starting lineup, Marsh immediately established himself as the clear WR1, catching 79% of his 53 targets with a robust 15.3 YPC average. The only two times Marsh failed to clear his 44.5 Receiving Yards line was in a 21-16 slog against Purdue when UM annihilated the Boilermakers on the ground to the tune of 253 rush yards, and in The Game when Ohio State’s truly elite defense put the clamps on Michigan’s pass game in inclement weather. Otherwise, Marsh cleared his very reasonable 44.5 Receiving Yards line in 6-of-8 starts. Against a depleted Texas secondary that is missing their Top 3 coverage DBs, I’m taking Marsh to go Over 44.5 Receiving Yards.
****
Our model calculates projections around each moneyline, spread and over/under bet for every game on the college football calendar based on data points like past performance, player matchups, stadium information and weather forecasts.
Once the model is finished running, we put its projection next to the latest betting lines for the game to arrive at a relative confidence level for each wager.
Best Bets our model is projecting for the Citrus Bowl between Michigan and Texas
- Moneyline: Rotoworld Bet is leaning towards a play on Michigan on the Moneyline.
- Spread: Rotoworld Bet is recommending a play ATS on the Michigan Wolverines +7.
- Total: Rotoworld Bet is staying away from a play on the Game Total of 48.5.
Rotoworld has you covered with all the latest college football betting news and analysis.
Follow our experts on socials to keep up with all the latest content from the staff:
- Jay Croucher (@croucherJD)
- Drew Dinsick (@whale_capper)
- Vaughn Dalzell (@VmoneySports)
- Trysta Krick (@Trysta_Krick)
- Eric Froton (@CFFroton)
