CHI Health Center Omaha · at Creighton
Closing line
CREI -19.5✓ CREI covered by 3.5
Closing total147.5Over by 13.5
| This season | CREI | |
|---|---|---|
| 4-6 | Record | 7-5 |
| 6-4 | ATS | 5-7 |
| 4-6 | O/U | 3-9 |
ATS = covered-didn’t-push · O/U = overs-unders
Model before tip-off: UTU 63–85 CREI · ✓ CREI (97%) won
Loading the game…
Box score
Score by half
| 1H | 2H | T | |
|---|---|---|---|
| UTU | 34 | 35 | 69 |
| CREI | 43 | 49 | 92 |
1st half: UTU 34, CREI 43 (CREI by 9). The model had CREI by 13.1 and a total of 69.0 (actual 77).
Team stats
| UTU | CREI | |
|---|---|---|
| 29-58 50% | Field goals | 34-63 54% |
| 6-18 33% | 3-pointers | 13-33 39% |
| 5-8 63% | Free throws | 11-15 73% |
| 28 5 off | Rebounds | 34 9 off |
| 15 | Assists | 23 |
| 8 | Steals | 11 |
| 3 | Blocks | 1 |
| 15 | Turnovers | 11 |
| 15 | Fouls | 10 |
| 44 | Points in paint | 42 |
| 6 | Fast-break points | 11 |
Players
| UTU | MIN | PTS | REB | AST | FG | 3P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jusaun Holt G | 35 | 16 | 4 | 2 | 6-10 | 3-5 |
| Noah Bolanga G | 35 | 9 | 3 | 5 | 4-9 | 0-4 |
| Ethan Potter F | 33 | 18 | 8 | 1 | 9-14 | 0-1 |
| Madiba Owona G | 24 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 3-8 | 0-1 |
| Tanner Davis G | 18 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1-4 | 0-1 |
| Bench | ||||||
| Chance Trujillo G | 30 | 8 | 3 | 3 | 3-6 | 2-4 |
| Britton Berrett G | 14 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1-2 | 1-2 |
| Dario Domingos F | 6 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 2-5 | 0-0 |
| Samuel Ariyibi F | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Did not play: Dallin Grant, Hunter Schenck, Preston Vandermyde, Marvel Allen, Boston Harker
| CREI | MIN | PTS | REB | AST | FG | 3P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Josh Dix G | 32 | 17 | 6 | 5 | 4-6 | 3-5 |
| Austin Swartz G | 28 | 19 | 1 | 1 | 7-12 | 5-9 |
| Isaac Traudt F | 24 | 13 | 3 | 0 | 5-13 | 3-9 |
| Jasen Green F | 22 | 10 | 5 | 4 | 5-6 | 0-0 |
| Ty Davis G | 18 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 2-3 | 0-1 |
| Bench | ||||||
| Nik Graves G | 22 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 3-5 | 0-1 |
| Fedor Zugic G | 18 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1-5 | 1-4 |
| Blake Harper G | 16 | 9 | 2 | 3 | 3-9 | 1-4 |
| Owen Freeman F | 14 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 3-3 | 0-0 |
| Kerem Konan F | 4 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| Shane Thomas G | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1-1 | 0-0 |
Did not play: Josh Townley-Thomas, Liam McChesney, Hudson Greer, Aleksa Dimitrijevic, Jackson McAndrew
Loading the game…
Market vs model
The model’s numbers beside the market’s
MarketModelModel edgeResult
Spread
MarketCREI -19.5
ModelCREI -22.1
Model edgeCREI +2.6
W CREI covered
Total
Market147.5
Model147.4
Model edgeUnder 0.1
L Over
Projected score
UTU 62.7 · CREI 84.8
UTU 69 · CREI 92
Win probability
CREI 97%
1st half
Spread
CREI -13.1
CREI -9.0
Total
69.0
77 points
Projected score
UTU 28 · CREI 41.1
UTU 34 · CREI 43
Market
Open → close
Spread
OpenCREI -20.5
1 → UTU
CloseCREI -19.5
1 pt toward UTU
Total
Open144.5
▲ 3
Close147.5
Up 3 since the open
Moneyline
UTU +1300 · CREI -2800
Line movement
Opening and closing line · tap a dot
Opened CREI -20.5 · closed CREI -19.5 · moved 1 toward UTUmodel CREI -22
model CREI -22
Opened 144.5 · closed 147.5 · moved 3 upmodel 147.5 matches the line
model 147.5 = line ✓
Openline modelTip-off
Pre-game lines only (ESPN, DraftKings first). After tip-off the line shown is the closing line.
Last 10 games
2025-26, before tip-off
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% | 4-6 40% | |
| 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% | 3-7 30% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Utah Tech
10 games played
Straight up
4-6
40% wins
Against the spread
6-4
60% covers · avg +0.9 pts vs the line
Over / Under
4-6
40% overs · avg −0.6 pts vs the total
Game by game: lines, results and totals
Lines, results and totalsCover margin by game · points beyond the lineTotal margin by game · points over or under the total
| Date | Opp | Result | Line | ATS | Total | O/U |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 3 | @ | W 81-79 | +1.5 | W +3.5 | 164.5 | U 160 |
| Nov 7 | @ | L 67-93 | +33.5 | W +7.5 | 162.5 | U 160 |
| Nov 9 | @ | L 66-81 | +12.5 | L −2.5 | 152.5 | U 147 |
| Nov 12 | vs | L 75-79 | -2.5 | L −6.5 | 158.5 | U 154 |
| Nov 14 | vs | W 81-75 | -26.5 | L −20.5 | 145.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 62-68 | +16.5 | W +10.5 | 149.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 63-68 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 146.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 77-69 | -5.5 | W +2.5 | 145.5 | O 146 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 80-90 | +20.5 | W +10.5 | 144.5 | O 170 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 82-80 | +5.5 | W +7.5 | 152.5 | O 162 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
SDAK
W 81-79
+3.5
7
@
ARIZ
L 67-93
+7.5
9
@
ASU
L 66-81
−2.5
12
vs
MAN
L 75-79
−6.5
14
vs
MVSU
W 81-75
−20.5
15
@
HAW
L 62-68
+10.5
25
vs
PRST
L 63-68
−3.5
29
vs
UCR
W 77-69
+2.5
3
@
SCU
L 80-90
+10.5
20
@
WEB
W 82-80
+7.5
covered 6didn’t cover 4avg +0.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
SDAK
W 81-79
−4.5
7
@
ARIZ
L 67-93
−2.5
9
@
ASU
L 66-81
−5.5
12
vs
MAN
L 75-79
−4.5
14
vs
MVSU
W 81-75
+10.5
15
@
HAW
L 62-68
−19.5
25
vs
PRST
L 63-68
−15.5
29
vs
UCR
W 77-69
+0.5
3
@
SCU
L 80-90
+25.5
20
@
WEB
W 82-80
+9.5
over 4under 6avg −0.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Creighton
12 games played
Straight up
7-5
58% wins
Against the spread
5-7
42% covers · avg −0.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
3-9
25% overs · avg −5.8 pts vs the total
Game by game: lines, results and totals
Lines, results and totalsCover margin by game · points beyond the lineTotal margin by game · points over or under the total
| Date | Opp | Result | Line | ATS | Total | O/U |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 5 | vs | W 92-76 | -29.5 | L −13.5 | 169.5 | U 168 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 63-90 | +12.5 | L −14.5 | 164.5 | U 153 |
| Nov 14 | vs | W 84-45 | -33.5 | W +5.5 | 135.5 | U 129 |
| Nov 19 | vs | W 75-60 | -29.5 | L −14.5 | 155.5 | U 135 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 74-81 | +3.5 | L −3.5 | 154.5 | O 155 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 60-78 | +9.5 | L −8.5 | 152.5 | U 138 |
| Nov 27 | vs | W 76-66 | -2.5 | W +7.5 | 150.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 2 | vs | W 96-76 | -18.5 | W +1.5 | 143.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 50-71 | +5.5 | L −15.5 | 155.5 | U 121 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 76-83 | -4.5 | L −11.5 | 159.5 | U 159 |
| Dec 17 | @ | W 98-57 | +2.5 | W +43.5 | 151.5 | O 155 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 84-63 | -6.5 | W +14.5 | 151.5 | U 147 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
5
vs
SDAK
W 92-76
−13.5
11
@
GONZ
L 63-90
−14.5
14
vs
UMES
W 84-45
+5.5
19
vs
UND
W 75-60
−14.5
24
vs
BAY
L 74-81
−3.5
25
vs
ISU
L 60-78
−8.5
27
vs
ORE
W 76-66
+7.5
2
vs
NICH
W 96-76
+1.5
7
@
NEB
L 50-71
−15.5
13
vs
KSU
L 76-83
−11.5
17
@
XAV
W 98-57
+43.5
20
vs
MARQ
W 84-63
+14.5
covered 5didn’t cover 7avg −0.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
5
vs
SDAK
W 92-76
−1.5
11
@
GONZ
L 63-90
−11.5
14
vs
UMES
W 84-45
−6.5
19
vs
UND
W 75-60
−20.5
24
vs
BAY
L 74-81
+0.5
25
vs
ISU
L 60-78
−14.5
27
vs
ORE
W 76-66
−8.5
2
vs
NICH
W 96-76
+28.5
7
@
NEB
L 50-71
−34.5
13
vs
KSU
L 76-83
−0.5
17
@
XAV
W 98-57
+3.5
20
vs
MARQ
W 84-63
−4.5
over 3under 9avg −5.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Utah Tech
4-6 overall · 0-0 in conference · Big Sky Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- W@ Weber St82–80
- L@ Santa Clara80–90
- Wvs UC Riverside77–69
- Lvs Portland St63–68
- L@ Hawai'i62–68
2 days since their last game.
Creighton
7-5 overall · 2-0 in conference · Big East Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Wvs Marquette84–63
- W@ Xavier98–57
- Lvs Kansas St76–83
- L@ Nebraska50–71
- Wvs Nicholls96–76
2 days since their last game.