Coleman Coliseum · at Alabama
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | ALA | |
|---|---|---|
| 0-0 | Record | 0-0 |
| 0-0 | ATS | 0-0 |
| 0-0 | O/U | 0-0 |
ATS = covered-didn’t-push · O/U = overs-unders
Model: projects ALA 98–70 · win probability ALA 99%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 167.6
Model edge
—
No market line yet
Public
—
No split yet for this game
The model has not beaten the closing line: with an edge of 3 or more it went 409-367 in 2025-26. Model record
What could decide it: ALA has more of the edges
OAK 1, ALA 6 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
ALA offense vs OAK defense
Offense 2nd of 366 against a defense 266th, on the model’s ratings
Shooting
Effective FG%: OAK 52.7 and allows 54.7; ALA 55.2 and allows 49.2
Context
Schedule so far
OAK has played the 150th-hardest schedule, ALA the 1st. A record against a soft schedule means less
OAK offense vs ALA defense
Offense 159th of 366 against a defense 54th, on the model’s ratings
Free throws
Free throw rate: OAK 38.1, ALA 36.0. Allowed: OAK 24.6, ALA 32.0
Home court
ALA at home. This season: ALA 0-0 at home, OAK 0-0 away
Three-pointers
OAK hits 34.7% and allows 34.3%; ALA hits 35.8% and allows 33.8%. Threes are 34.0% and 54.3% of their shots
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: OAK 20%, ALA 46%. Transfers in: OAK 5, ALA 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: OAK 31.3%, ALA 32.4%. Defensive: OAK 65.6%, ALA 67.2%
Context
Tempo
About 73 possessions: OAK plays 71.1 a game (67th fastest), ALA 74.7 (7th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: OAK 14.7%, ALA 13.1%. Forced: OAK 15.1%, ALA 12.8%
Market
Open → current
Spread
Open—
no open
Now—
Opening line not available
Total
Open—
no open
Now—
Moneyline
—
Pre-game lines only (ESPN, DraftKings first). After tip-off the line shown is the closing line.
Model vs market
| Market | Model | Model edge | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Spread | — | ALA -28.6 | — |
| Total | — | 167.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | OAK 69.5 · ALA 98.1 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | ALA -16.9 | — |
| 1H total | 78.2 | — |
| 1H projected score | OAK 30.7 · ALA 47.6 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 40% | 4-6 40% | 4-6 40% | |
| 7-3 70% | 5-5 50% | 5-5 50% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
OAK 0–1 ALAALA leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · OAK 0-1 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 19, 2021-22 | OAK 59 @ ALA 86 | ALA -16.5 | ALA W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Oakland
31 games played
Straight up
15-16
48% wins
Against the spread
17-14
55% covers · avg −0.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
19-12
61% overs · avg +4.1 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 | @ | L 78-121 | +24.5 | L −18.5 | 156.5 | O 199 |
| Nov 7 | @ | L 77-87 | +31.5 | W +21.5 | 158.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 12 | @ | L 45-78 | +30.5 | L −2.5 | 138.5 | U 123 |
| Nov 17 | @ | L 83-87 | +13.5 | W +9.5 | 163.5 | O 170 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 91-97 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 153.5 | O 188 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 83-68 | -3.5 | W +11.5 | 148.5 | O 151 |
| Nov 25 | @ | W 95-87 | +4.5 | W +12.5 | 162.5 | O 182 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 101-92 | -4.5 | W +4.5 | 162.5 | O 193 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 98-97 | -4.5 | L −3.5 | 166.5 | O 195 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 63-75 | +8.5 | L −3.5 | 149.5 | U 138 |
| Dec 17 | @ | W 82-77 | +3.5 | W +8.5 | 163.5 | U 159 |
| Dec 20 | vs | L 70-79 | +19.5 | W +10.5 | 155.5 | U 149 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 73-88 | +3.5 | L −11.5 | 159.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 1 | @ | W 85-83 | +1.5 | W +3.5 | 157.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 96-73 | -1.5 | W +21.5 | 161.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 9 | vs | W 97-74 | -15.5 | W +7.5 | 169.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 11 | vs | L 84-94 | -4.5 | L −14.5 | 161.5 | O 178 |
| Jan 15 | @ | W 73-60 | -2.5 | W +10.5 | 166.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 18 | @ | W 88-63 | -4.5 | W +20.5 | 153.5 | U 151 |
| Jan 21 | vs | L 85-103 | -14.5 | L −32.5 | 176.5 | O 188 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 95-87 | -6.5 | W +1.5 | 167.5 | O 182 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 74-65 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 162.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 1 | vs | W 76-65 | -3.5 | W +7.5 | 166.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 78-91 | -7.5 | L −20.5 | 170.5 | U 169 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 82-86 | -3.5 | L −7.5 | 155.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 15 | @ | L 69-93 | +1.5 | L −22.5 | 156.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 20 | vs | L 68-73 | -6.5 | L −11.5 | 153.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 22 | vs | W 81-70 | -5.5 | W +5.5 | 159.5 | U 151 |
| Feb 25 | @ | W 86-74 | -5.5 | W +6.5 | 169.5 | U 160 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 89-95 | -8.5 | L −14.5 | 160.5 | O 184 |
| Mar 4 | vs | L 84-85 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 161.5 | O 169 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
MICH
L 78-121
−18.5
7
@
PUR
L 77-87
+21.5
12
@
HOU
L 45-78
−2.5
17
@
UCF
L 83-87
+9.5
21
@
EMU
L 91-97
−7.5
24
vs
LAM
W 83-68
+11.5
25
@
MONT
W 95-87
+12.5
3
vs
PFW
W 101-92
+4.5
6
vs
TOL
W 98-97
−3.5
13
@
UNI
L 63-75
−3.5
17
@
NKU
W 82-77
+8.5
20
vs
MSU
L 70-79
+10.5
29
@
WRST
L 73-88
−11.5
1
@
YSU
W 85-83
+3.5
4
vs
RMU
W 96-73
+21.5
9
vs
CLE
W 97-74
+7.5
11
vs
WRST
L 84-94
−14.5
15
@
MILW
W 73-60
+10.5
18
@
GB
W 88-63
+20.5
21
vs
IUIN
L 85-103
−32.5
24
@
DETM
W 95-87
+1.5
28
@
PFW
W 74-65
+7.5
1
vs
NKU
W 76-65
+7.5
4
@
CLE
L 78-91
−20.5
12
vs
YSU
L 82-86
−7.5
15
@
RMU
L 69-93
−22.5
20
vs
GB
L 68-73
−11.5
22
vs
MILW
W 81-70
+5.5
25
@
IUIN
W 86-74
+6.5
28
vs
DETM
L 89-95
−14.5
4
vs
NKU
L 84-85
−2.5
covered 17didn’t cover 14avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
MICH
L 78-121
+42.5
7
@
PUR
L 77-87
+5.5
12
@
HOU
L 45-78
−15.5
17
@
UCF
L 83-87
+6.5
21
@
EMU
L 91-97
+34.5
24
vs
LAM
W 83-68
+2.5
25
@
MONT
W 95-87
+19.5
3
vs
PFW
W 101-92
+30.5
6
vs
TOL
W 98-97
+28.5
13
@
UNI
L 63-75
−11.5
17
@
NKU
W 82-77
−4.5
20
vs
MSU
L 70-79
−6.5
29
@
WRST
L 73-88
+1.5
1
@
YSU
W 85-83
+10.5
4
vs
RMU
W 96-73
+7.5
9
vs
CLE
W 97-74
+1.5
11
vs
WRST
L 84-94
+16.5
15
@
MILW
W 73-60
−33.5
18
@
GB
W 88-63
−2.5
21
vs
IUIN
L 85-103
+11.5
24
@
DETM
W 95-87
+14.5
28
@
PFW
W 74-65
−23.5
1
vs
NKU
W 76-65
−25.5
4
@
CLE
L 78-91
−1.5
12
vs
YSU
L 82-86
+12.5
15
@
RMU
L 69-93
+5.5
20
vs
GB
L 68-73
−12.5
22
vs
MILW
W 81-70
−8.5
25
@
IUIN
W 86-74
−9.5
28
vs
DETM
L 89-95
+23.5
4
vs
NKU
L 84-85
+7.5
over 19under 12avg +4.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Alabama
35 games played
Straight up
25-10
71% wins
Against the spread
16-19
46% covers · avg +1.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
19-16
54% overs · avg +0.8 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 3 | vs | W 91-62 | -36.5 | L −7.5 | 170.5 | U 153 |
| Nov 8 | @ | W 103-96 | +4.5 | W +11.5 | 172.5 | O 199 |
| Nov 13 | vs | L 80-87 | -3.5 | L −10.5 | 172.5 | U 167 |
| Nov 19 | vs | W 90-86 | +2.5 | W +6.5 | 180.5 | U 176 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 85-95 | +4.5 | L −5.5 | 178.5 | O 180 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 115-76 | -13.5 | W +25.5 | 181.5 | O 191 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 105-72 | -14.5 | W +18.5 | 166.5 | O 177 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 90-84 | -8.5 | L −2.5 | 165.5 | O 174 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 97-55 | -33.5 | W +8.5 | 171.5 | U 152 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 75-96 | +2.5 | L −18.5 | 178.5 | U 171 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 104-93 | -14.5 | L −3.5 | 178.5 | O 197 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 92-81 | -20.5 | L −9.5 | 182.5 | U 173 |
| Dec 29 | vs | W 102-78 | -15.5 | W +8.5 | 171.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 89-74 | -5.5 | W +9.5 | 173.5 | U 163 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 90-96 | +3.5 | L −2.5 | 176.5 | O 186 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 88-92 | -11.5 | L −15.5 | 177.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 13 | @ | W 97-82 | -4.5 | W +10.5 | 171.5 | O 179 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 83-81 | -5.5 | L −3.5 | 177.5 | U 164 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 73-79 | -4.5 | L −10.5 | 167.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 27 | vs | W 90-64 | -10.5 | W +15.5 | 167.5 | U 154 |
| Feb 1 | @ | L 77-100 | +9.5 | L −13.5 | 176.5 | O 177 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 100-97 | -8.5 | L −5.5 | 180.5 | O 197 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 96-92 | +2.5 | W +6.5 | 175.5 | O 188 |
| Feb 11 | @ | W 93-74 | -6.5 | W +12.5 | 164.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 89-75 | -17.5 | L −3.5 | 170.5 | U 164 |
| Feb 18 | vs | W 117-115 | -3.5 | L −1.5 | 181.5 | O 232 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 90-83 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 172.5 | O 173 |
| Feb 25 | vs | W 100-75 | -12.5 | W +12.5 | 176.5 | U 175 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 71-69 | +5.5 | W +7.5 | 162.5 | U 140 |
| Mar 3 | @ | L 88-98 | -1.5 | L −11.5 | 179.5 | O 186 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 96-84 | -5.5 | W +6.5 | 175.5 | O 180 |
| Mar 13 | vs | L 79-80 | -12.5 | L −13.5 | 166.5 | U 159 |
| Mar 20 | vs | W 90-70 | -11.5 | W +8.5 | 158.5 | O 160 |
| Mar 22 | vs | W 90-65 | -1.5 | W +23.5 | 164.5 | U 155 |
| Mar 27 | vs | L 77-90 | +9.5 | L −3.5 | 172.5 | U 167 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
UND
W 91-62
−7.5
8
@
SJU
W 103-96
+11.5
13
vs
PUR
L 80-87
−10.5
19
vs
ILL
W 90-86
+6.5
24
vs
GONZ
L 85-95
−5.5
25
vs
UNLV
W 115-76
+25.5
26
vs
MD
W 105-72
+18.5
3
vs
CLEM
W 90-84
−2.5
7
vs
UTSA
W 97-55
+8.5
13
vs
ARIZ
L 75-96
−18.5
17
vs
USF
W 104-93
−3.5
21
vs
KENN
W 92-81
−9.5
29
vs
YALE
W 102-78
+8.5
3
vs
UK
W 89-74
+9.5
7
@
VAN
L 90-96
−2.5
10
vs
TEX
L 88-92
−15.5
13
@
MSST
W 97-82
+10.5
17
@
OU
W 83-81
−3.5
24
vs
TENN
L 73-79
−10.5
27
vs
MIZ
W 90-64
+15.5
1
@
FLA
L 77-100
−13.5
4
vs
TA&M
W 100-97
−5.5
7
@
AUB
W 96-92
+6.5
11
@
MISS
W 93-74
+12.5
14
vs
SC
W 89-75
−3.5
18
vs
ARK
W 117-115
−1.5
21
@
LSU
W 90-83
−0.5
25
vs
MSST
W 100-75
+12.5
28
@
TENN
W 71-69
+7.5
3
@
UGA
L 88-98
−11.5
7
vs
AUB
W 96-84
+6.5
13
vs
MISS
L 79-80
−13.5
20
vs
HOF
W 90-70
+8.5
22
vs
TTU
W 90-65
+23.5
27
vs
MICH
L 77-90
−3.5
covered 16didn’t cover 19avg +1.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
UND
W 91-62
−17.5
8
@
SJU
W 103-96
+26.5
13
vs
PUR
L 80-87
−5.5
19
vs
ILL
W 90-86
−4.5
24
vs
GONZ
L 85-95
+1.5
25
vs
UNLV
W 115-76
+9.5
26
vs
MD
W 105-72
+10.5
3
vs
CLEM
W 90-84
+8.5
7
vs
UTSA
W 97-55
−19.5
13
vs
ARIZ
L 75-96
−7.5
17
vs
USF
W 104-93
+18.5
21
vs
KENN
W 92-81
−9.5
29
vs
YALE
W 102-78
+8.5
3
vs
UK
W 89-74
−10.5
7
@
VAN
L 90-96
+9.5
10
vs
TEX
L 88-92
+2.5
13
@
MSST
W 97-82
+7.5
17
@
OU
W 83-81
−13.5
24
vs
TENN
L 73-79
−15.5
27
vs
MIZ
W 90-64
−13.5
1
@
FLA
L 77-100
+0.5
4
vs
TA&M
W 100-97
+16.5
7
@
AUB
W 96-92
+12.5
11
@
MISS
W 93-74
+2.5
14
vs
SC
W 89-75
−6.5
18
vs
ARK
W 117-115
+50.5
21
@
LSU
W 90-83
+0.5
25
vs
MSST
W 100-75
−1.5
28
@
TENN
W 71-69
−22.5
3
@
UGA
L 88-98
+6.5
7
vs
AUB
W 96-84
+4.5
13
vs
MISS
L 79-80
−7.5
20
vs
HOF
W 90-70
+1.5
22
vs
TTU
W 90-65
−9.5
27
vs
MICH
L 77-90
−5.5
over 19under 16avg +0.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Alabama has the better starters
Position by position: Oakland 1, Alabama 4, even 0
OaklandBetterAlabama
G N. Mashhour9 pts · 2.9 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 22
→ALABig
G A. Holloway16.8 pts · 2.8 reb · 3.8 ast
Score 99
G B. Swartz TR7.7 pts · 4.5 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 41
→ALABig
G A. Allen11.4 pts · 6.9 reb · 3.1 ast
Score 94
F B. El Shakery TR11.2 pts · 8 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 59
→ALABig
F D. Fielder TR14.4 pts · 5.4 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 98
F C. Fields TR9.1 pts · 6.2 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 79
←OAKSmall
F J. Davis-Fleming TR3.7 pts · 4.8 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 59
F J. Hill TR7 pts · 4.4 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 16
→ALABig
F B. Garrison TR4.7 pts · 4.1 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 73
OaklandBetterAlabama
OAK offense159th of 366 · -4.8
→ALASmall
ALA defense54th of 366 · +1.5
OAK defense266th of 366 · -6.8
→ALABig
ALA offense2nd of 366 · +13.7
Backcourt-3.2 · 2 players
→ALABig
Backcourt+8.7 · 2 players
Frontcourt-0.2 · 3 players
→ALABig
Frontcourt+5.2 · 3 players
Bench-1.7 · 2 players
→ALASmall
Bench+0.5 · 4 players
Score, worst to bestOAK betterALA betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
N. Mashhour28 minB. Swartz21 min · TRW. Marshall12 minR. Taylor11 min · TRW. KassiNewH. MashhourNew
Forwards
B. El Shakery27 min · TRC. Fields18 min · TRJ. Hill17 min · TRN. AhnerNewC. ThompsonNewI. TheodileNew
Guards
A. Holloway28 minA. Allen28 minP. Murphy3 minC. CloerNewQ. SamuelsNewA. DiazNew
Forwards
D. Fielder24 min · TRJ. Davis-Fleming20 min · TRB. Garrison16 min · TRL. Jemison16 minK. Bristow13 minJ. RichardsonNew
Centers
C. Onyejiaka6 minT. St. LouisNew
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Matchup stats
2025-26 · rank among 365 teams
Scoring
Points per game
Points per possession
Pace (possessions)
Shooting
Effective FG%
3-point %
3-point attempt rate
Free throw rate
Possessions
Turnover rate
Offensive rebound rate
Assists per game
Defense
Points allowed
Points allowed per possession
Opponent effective FG%
Opponent 3-point %
Turnovers forced
Defensive rebound rate
Steals per game
Blocks per game
| Scoring | ||
|---|---|---|
| 81.6 #37 | Points per game | 91.2 #1 |
| 1.14 #66 | Points per possession | 1.22 #5 |
| 71.1 #67 | Pace (possessions) | 74.7 #7 |
| Shooting | ||
| 52.7 #114 | Effective FG% | 55.2 #34 |
| 34.7 #131 | 3-point % | 35.8 #66 |
| 34.0 #294 | 3-point attempt rate | 54.3 #1 |
| 38.1 #100 | Free throw rate | 36.0 #150 |
| Possessions | ||
| 14.7 #47 | Turnover rate | 13.1 #10 |
| 31.3 #152 | Offensive rebound rate | 32.4 #111 |
| 15.7 #60 | Assists per game | 16.3 #39 |
| Defense | ||
| 82.8 #344 | Points allowed | 82.7 #343 |
| 1.17 #340 | Points allowed per possession | 1.11 #232 |
| 54.7 #322 | Opponent effective FG% | 49.2 #73 |
| 34.3 #206 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.8 #170 |
| 15.1 #275 | Turnovers forced | 12.8 #361 |
| 65.6 #324 | Defensive rebound rate | 67.2 #295 |
| 7.2 #106 | Steals per game | 6.4 #186 |
| 3.7 #110 | Blocks per game | 5.0 #17 |
Oakland
15-16 in 2025-26 overall · 12-9 in conference · Horizon League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs N Kentucky84–85
- Lvs Detroit Mercy89–95
- W@ IU Indy86–74
- Wvs Milwaukee81–70
- Lvs Green Bay68–73
A week or more of rest.
Alabama
25-10 in 2025-26 overall · 13-6 in conference · Southeastern Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Michigan77–90
- Wvs Texas Tech90–65
- Wvs Hofstra90–70
- Lvs Ole Miss79–80
- Wvs Auburn96–84
A week or more of rest.